The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    SSD Performance: Microsoft Standard SATA AHCI Controller driver vs AMD SATA Controller driver

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by davidricardo86, Jan 21, 2014.

  1. davidricardo86

    davidricardo86 Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    2,376
    Messages:
    1,774
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    81
    So I noticed that using either of these two SATA Controller drivers results in slightly different benchmark results. It surprised me to see that the Microsoft Standard SATA AHCI Controller driver sometimes outperforms (at least in this benchmark) the AMD SATA Controller driver resulting in a total score that's almost 2 times larger. I ran the benchmark on each SATA Controller driver at least 5 times each and the results were mostly reproducible, with the occasional drop in 4K-64Thrd reading.


    PC Specs:
    Acer Aspire V5-122P-0600
    AMD A6-1450 (locked @ 1.38GHz via "sleep-and-wake trick")
    10GB DDR3L-1600 (1066MHz)
    Samsung 830 256GB SATA III SSD (no overprovision/unallocated partition at the time of benchmarks, 78.3GB Used space, 159GB Free space, 237GB Formatted Capacity NTFS GPT)
    40W Acer AC adapter
    Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit


    [​IMG]
    Standard SATA AHCI Controller_01 by davidc646, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    Standard SATA AHCI Controller_02 by davidc646, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    AMD SATA Controller_01 by davidc646, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    AMD SATA Controller_02 by davidc646, on Flickr


    I assumed that the AMD SATA Controller driver would be the one showing the best performance overall but that isn't the case here. I'm not looking for anything concrete, just some ideas or thoughts would be appreciated.

    Can anyone help me understand or explain why this might be happening? Why is there such a large difference in the "4K-64Thrd" read score (resulting in the big difference in total score)?
     
    davidricardo86, Jan 21, 2014
    #1
  2. tilleroftheearth

    tilleroftheearth Wisdom listens quietly...

    Reputations:
    5,398
    Messages:
    12,692
    Likes Received:
    2,717
    Trophy Points:
    631
    I think the same thing happens with the Intel drivers too and another reason why I don't put too much stock in benchmarks - the proper driver (IRST or AMD) always gives the most responsive, real world system in my experience.

    Are you sure you have the latest AMD driver though? I could swear I've seen v2.x installed somewhere? Maybe I was drinking then? :)

    See:
    AMD Chipset Drivers
     
    tilleroftheearth, Jan 21, 2014
    #2
  3. davidricardo86

    davidricardo86 Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    2,376
    Messages:
    1,774
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    81
    I was using the 13.12 Chipset Drivers dated 9/18/2013. Those 13.4 Chipset Drivers you linked are dated 4/24/2013.

    That seems backwards to me. :confused:

    Oh and I know its just a benchmark but it gives me warm fuzzy feelings inside seeing that number lol, I'll keep my eye out for anymore anomalies.
     
    davidricardo86, Jan 22, 2014
    #3
  4. tilleroftheearth

    tilleroftheearth Wisdom listens quietly...

    Reputations:
    5,398
    Messages:
    12,692
    Likes Received:
    2,717
    Trophy Points:
    631
    Hmmm... I didn't link to any specific driver - the page has a variety to choose from (make sure you pick the right platform...).


    Forget the numbers... does the system feel/perform slower with/without them installed?
     
    tilleroftheearth, Jan 22, 2014
    #4