AS SSD Benchmark


Benchmark Reviews (© 2010):

“Solid State Drives have traveled a long winding course to finally get where they are today. Up to this point in technology, there have been several key differences separating Solid State Drives from magnetic rotational Hard Disk Drives. While the DRAM-based buffer size on desktop HDDs has recently reached 32 MB and is ever-increasing, there is still a hefty delay in the initial response time. This is one key area in which flash-based Solid State Drives continually dominates because they lack moving parts to “get up to speed”. However the benefits inherent to SSDs have traditionally fallen off once the throughput begins, even though data reads or writes are executed at a high constant rate whereas the HDD tapers off in performance. This makes the average transaction speed of a SSD comparable to the data burst rate mentioned in HDD tests, albeit usually lower than the HDD’s speed. Comparing a Solid State Disk to a standard Hard Disk Drives is always relative; even if you’re comparing the fastest rotational spindle speeds. One is going to be many times faster in response (SSDs), while the other is usually going to have higher throughput bandwidth (HDDs).”

Patriot Inferno SSD Kit PI100GS25SSDR (24 May 2010)

“The biggest mistake PC hardware enthusiast make with SSDs is grading them by their speed. File transfer speed is important, but only so long as the operational IOPS performance can sustain that bandwidth under load. Benchmark Reviews tests the 100GB Patriot Inferno SSD, model PI100GS25SSDR, against some of the most popular storage devices available and demonstrates that 4K IOPS performance is more important than speed. For decades, the slowest component in any computer system was the hard drive. Most modern processors operate within approximately 1 ns (nanosecond = one billionth of one second) response time, while system memory responds between 30-90 ns. Traditional Hard Disk Drive (HDD) technology utilizes magnetic spinning media, and even the fastest spinning desktop storage products exhibit a 9,000,000 ns – or 9 ms (millisecond = one thousandth of one second) initial response time. In more relevant terms, The processor receives the command and waits for system memory to fetch related data from the storage drive. The difference a SSD makes to operational reaction times and program speeds is dramatic, and takes the storage drive from a slow ‘walking’ speed to a much faster ‘driving’ speed. Solid State Drive technology improves initial response times by more than 450x (45,000%) for applications and Operating System software, when compared to their HDD counterparts. Alex Schepeljanski of Alex Intelligent Software develops the free AS SSD Benchmark utility for testing storage devices. The AS SSD Benchmark tests sequential read and write speeds, input/output operational performance, and response times. Because this software receives frequent updates, Benchmark Reviews recommends that you compare results only within the same version family. Beginning with sequential read and write performance, the Patriot Inferno Solid State Drive produced 207.95 MB/s read speed, and 130.60 MB/s write performance. The sequential file transfer speeds have traditionally been low with this benchmark tool, especially for SandForce controllers, which is why we will concentrate on the operational IOPS performance for this section. Single-threaded 4K IOPS performance delivers 21.54 MB/s read and 61.18 MB/s write, which is among the highest results we’ve recorded. Similarly, the 64-thread 4K reads recorded 124.05 MB/s while write performance was 94.46… both earning the Patriot Inferno SSD a spot at the very top of our charts.”

Chatwin’s opinion: The Patriot Inferno (on the left) has excellent random R/W values, thanks to the SandForce controller, which uses complex algorithms to compress small user-data into 4K flash pages. The manufacturer also implements some kind of data redundancy, to ensure data integrity. All of this increases the IOPS and efficiency of the SSD and reduces the need for high quality (SLC) NAND flash or large DRAM buffers. The Indilinx controller of the Vertex Turbo (on the right) has a straight forward page level mapping (with 64 MB memory cache to combine write requests). In combination with a logical/physical 1:1 mapping (LBA/SSD), the Vertex (RAID 0, specifications: “The Force“) outperforms every other MLC SSD I’ve seen so far in access time (except the Intel X25-M G2 Postville, with a narrowed write bandwidth of 95 MB/s and 32K clustering on-the-fly, these SSD’s are simply unbeatable…). The sequential read/write speed is quite impressive. The two OCZ Vertex Turbo’s score lower IOPS values than the Patriot, but the bandwidth is much higher, even for RAID configurations.

Besides an exceptional response time, the result is better write coalescing when using my workstation for day-to-day stuff: email checking, editing office documents, internet browsing (caching redirected to hard disk of course). An average of 30 MB/hour at the most (zero to 3 when left for idle). I use Diskeeper HyperFast for maintenance, but so far it never initiated an automatic (free space) defragmentation. Even after several months of installing software and restoring system backups.

Note: AS SSD Benchmark was run in 2 sessions (first: Seq./Acc. Time, then 4K (-64) Thrd). No tricks or manipulations involved…
as-ssd-bench_Patriot-Inferno-AHCIas-ssd-bench Vertex0 18-6-2010

About these ads

About Chatwin
This is my website: http://rdwaal.com/, dedicated to my personal designed computer with relevant technological know-how which I learned during my testing and fine tuning period. Concept PC “The Force” evolved in 21 months (minus 7 days) from only a slight idea, till an amazing workstation with remarkable capabilities. It wasn’t labor for me, nor suffering or hard work. It was fun.... If you’re interested in a custom build computer, based on your own preferences, contact me for further information. I only use the best hardware with an acceptable price level. I can assure the best performance within your budget and an unique (thoroughly tested) concept computer/server.

11 Responses to AS SSD Benchmark

  1. Esin says:

    All shlrducees assume seek time is very large compared to sequential read time. That is not tne case with SSDs. Hence, the scheduler assumptions will cause problems that get worse when more complex SSD controllers are present. In fact, a good SSD controller will have a scheduler of his own, and this may cause conflicts.CFQ is very complex. It gives highest priority to real-time reads and puts everything else on a queue using some complicated stochastic model. It has a high probability of conflicting with the SSD controller.Deadline is very simple. It also prioritizes real-time processes; but all other requests simply have a deadline assigned and are executed in elevator order (the lower address closest to the last read is read). When a deadline of some request is reached, the scheduler jumps to that request. Users are finding that deadline works reasonably well with the SSD controller.Anticipatory is very closely tied with hard-drive structure. It waits some time for nearby reads (which is an irrelevant strategy in SSDs), and then proceeds in elevator order, like in deadline (except that there are no deadlines!). It should never be used with SSDs.Noop is the simplest, and just assumes that scheduling is done by the SSD (or hardware RAID) controller. It serves requests in the order they are received. Theoretically is the best choice for SSDs, but its performance depends heavily on the smartness of the scheduller in the SSD controller. We can only guess that

  2. Jay Blitz says:

    I like this web site because so much utile material on here : D.

  3. 模具 says:

    Gorgeous Stuff! My spouse and i had been only contemplating that there’s too much wrong important info on this theme and you also just simply updated our judgement. Appreciate your sharing a very effective piece of writing.

  4. Cira Schlipf says:

    I’m honored to obtain a call from my friend when he found out the important suggestions shared on the site. Going through your blog article is a real brilliant experience. Thanks again for taking into consideration readers much like me, and I desire for you the best of achievements as being a professional in this field.

  5. ipad says:

    Actually genuinely great weblog article which has received me considering. I by no means looked at this from the stage of look at.

  6. Lou Dragone says:

    Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. After all I’ll be subscribing to your rss feed and I hope you write again soon!

  7. tabata says:

    I like your fantastic web site. Just what I was searching for!
    Best regards

  8. Catharine Reidhaar says:

    very good submit, i definitely love this web site, keep on it

  9. nike air says:

    Thank you incredibly substantially for your exciting text. I have been looking for these types of message to get a definitely very long time. Thank you.

  10. iPhone5 says:

    This has actually sparked up an idea in my mind. This really is a superb weblog article.

  11. Tuan Rossean says:

    Interestingly this blog, you could update it more generally ..:)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: