Slow SSD write speed with RAID 0?

Hi guys, I just got got a MSI GT70 Dragon edition over the weekend (if you have read my other posts...I posted a few about it) and found some problem with the RAID 0 setup.

I tested the mSATA RAID 0 setup using AS SSD benchmark and Crystaldiskmark. For the sack of convince I will just use the CDM's result.

Under default (random) setting's, I have a read speed of 885MB/s and a write speed of 262MB/s.

For comparsion, I also tested my SSD in my desktop, which is just a single drive and got 496MB/s read and 286MB/s when I first got it, but the write speed dropped significantly just recently I don't know why. But that's not my concern at the moment.

I also used bootracer to test and got 9 sec to logon and 27sec to desktop??? ??? My desktop is giving me 7s and 6s respectively and the link below showed a 7s logon 14s load desktop. And I have win8 on my MSI and win7 for desktop/link test. I thought win8 is supposed to be FASTER than win7

Also I used this guy's test as a reference: 追求極致效能與影音享受之高階ç†é›» - msi Gaming GT70完整解析 - WIND3C - 無名小站, if you scroll down you will see all the result. My AS SSD testing turned to be much slower than his as well.
I did call MSI about this, but they threw this hardware variation stuff at me again, 90MB/s+ difference is just a hardware variation? I found that hard to believe!

My drive model is shown as TS128GSSD720 via BIOS, which should have a read speed of 550MB/s and write speed of 510MB/s Laptop model: GT70 0NE 610US via memoryexpress.

Any thought would be great!

 

If you search the forums here - you'll see I spent about 5 minutes with a demo RAID0 enabled MSI setup and was sorely disappointed in the 'performance' of the 'super raid' system.

RAID0 is just a gimmick as you're seeing with SSD's - a larger capacity SSD will be infinitely faster (over time) than the 128GB non-optimized low channel count mSATA SSD - especially when two such SSD's are in a RAID0 array.

The only way to get the performance back is to SE your SSD's (individually) and re-install Windows (RAID array HIGHLY NOT RECOMMENDED).


You can try to defrag (using PerfectDisk's 'Prep for Shrink' option - use the trial for this) the array and Shrink the volume to as small as you dare.

Then, create a new partition with the 'unallocated' capacity and simply do a Format (this should TRIM the drive as much as possible).

At this point - I would leave the system for at least an hour to let it do any GC and/or TRIM cleanup it can.

When this 'rest' period (make sure the system doesn't go to sleep during this time...) is over - DELETE the new partition you created and then Extend the C: partition back to the size you need.


Hope this helps.

Good luck.

 

Thanks,
Idk...I'm just very disappointed at this whole RAID SSD thing sigh...I'm revamping the system to Win7 (I dislike Win8, I can't get around it, can't work on that platform) and try a few things from there

 

Win8x64 PRO is very easy to get used to. 10 minutes and the things you need to know are learned and simply used. Right now, Win7 seems like a cruel joke to me... lol...


Thought you might like this comparison of 2.5" SSD's in RAID0 (remember: even though the smaller capacities are still not optimized (re: controller channels, interleaving and firmware - even if the firmware number is identical to the higher capacity models...) - they are still worlds better than the still more compromised mSATA SSD's you're running).

See:
One SSD Vs. Two In RAID: Which Is Better? : Are Two SSDs Any Better Than One?



Too bad they didn't do a 'steady state' run of the real world benchmarks with these tests - I guess they don't want to publish a too embarrassing 'score' for Samsung (in this specific case).


Try to give Win8 a second chance - Windows 7 feels like Windows 98SE in comparison to the under the hood optimizations Win 8 has.


To really make Win8 fly, try the following suggestions also:

See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...rage/718208-asus-ux32vd-db71.html#post9194652



Good luck.

 

have you turned on your raid volume's write-back cache?

if you are not sure, go to your device manage, under disk drives right click on you intel raid 0 volume and open properties, select the policies tab and tick both the boxes, then go on your intel rapid storage technology, under the manage tab select your raid volume (not the seperate drive), click on advanced and enable write-back cache by clicking on the blue enable sign

the seq write speed bumped up to 800+ from 200+ in my SSD, 4k qd=32 bumped to 500+ and 4k qd=1 bumped to 200 ish,,,,

 

While I 'liked' the suggestion above - in the end it will only make your SSD's get slower, faster. :^)

But I hope it works for you as you have just received this system and I'm assuming it's 'brand new'.


Good luck.

 

is your statement true even though trim is enabled? other than that make sure you check the option rom upon boot up if it's version 11.x.x.x or 12.x.x.x, your rapid storage technology installed in windows should match the 1st set of numbers too, ie. (boot up option rom shows 11.0.1.139 then you should install IRST version 11.7.0.1013 or the latest 11.7.x.x IRST, for option rom 12.0.x.x then the latest 12.5.x.x or something, if the 1st set of numbers don't match trim will only be "enabled" but not "executed" correctly ie: delete notify in cmd only shows if the commands are sent to the drives, but does not check if the commands are executed, its like you sent payment to the seller(windows send trim command to drive) but the seller doesn't dispatch the item no matter what you do (drive doesn't respond to the command)

 

Yeah - even with TRIM enabled - something about mSATA (low nand chip count - controller channels not fully/optimally populated - nand chips not optimally interleaved - and most detrimental of all - small capacity/small amount of nand to actually 'play' (for TRIM, GC, etc). Throw this ugly mix into RAID0 and trouble is the systems middle name.

I haven't heard that before about the RST versions (needing to be matched to the ROM...) - I'll have to keep an eye out for more info about that in the future.

 

Its just about matching the first numbers, I've tested with trimcheck and winHex and can verify that without any other software modification, new programs, IRST 12.x.x.x in windows cannot execute the trim commands properly with my Oprom which is 11.0.x.x, whereas after uninstalling the IRST and installing 11.7.0.1013 it works again, and just to verify its not a bad installation I did checked again by uninstalling 11.7 and reinstalled 12.x, which again trim doesn't work until I revert back to 11.7, thus it ensures that under a clean and proper install, IRST 12.x does not properly associate with oprom 11.0.x

though I thought the mSATA SSD is just the SATA SSD with smaller physical size nand chip and smaller PCB with similar but simplified wiring, what you are suggesting is otherwise, but to my understanding is that, the msata SSD physical size is about half of a SATA SSD, and the storage capacity is also halved.... is there no association to simply a physical size reduction

 

How exactly does one do Secure Erase (SE)???

Tiller, you're really too much on this whole "goodness" of Win8 thing, and now bashing Win7!

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

For others, wait for the soon to be released Win8.1 (or whatever cute new name M.S. gives it).

 

I have not seen that behavior in the many (100's) of system's I'm responsible for. It has to be your specific setup. In my experience, having the latest IRST driver (currently v12.5xx) almost always delivers the best real world performance from my storage subsystems (even if the benchmark 'scores' look worse).

No direct relationship between size and capacity between mSATA vs. 2.5" SATA SSD's. The nand chips are the same/similar physical size (if both are from the same generation of nand) and the 'wiring' is simpler Just because usually 4 channels are used in the mSATA SSD's (vs. 8 channels for 2.5" SSD's).

The 'size' advantage comes from not having a case and standard connectors.

This review may help you see the difference better:

See:
AnandTech | Plextor M5M (256GB) mSATA Review

A SE is achieved with various tools - but it will totally destroy all data on the drive and (hopefully) bring the performance back to as-new condition.

See:
How To Secure Erase Corsair SSDs With Parted Magic


The above is one example of how to do a SE.


As for bashing Win7 - no, I'm not. Just in comparison to Win8 it seems so ancient and comical when I am forced to use it on clients systems.

You may be surprised that I HATED Win8 when I was just reading about it during it's 'beta' phase.

When I had the time to spend a few minutes with it (literally) on my own - in my own workflow and see the issues I faced first hand - all the moaning I had done was for nothing. The Start screen is just a bigger Start Menu... and I don't use any 'app' from the Windows store, well, maybe Weather.



What I find the most useful (actually addicted to...) is the new task manager that shows what any benchmark tool does: % cpu load at xxGHz speed - the disk average response time along with the Read and Write speeds... with the Active Disk Time too on a single 'view'.


Progress can't be stopped and Win8 is surely the pinnacle of O/S's right now - why stick to a good, but played out O/S like Win7?

Surely not for productivity reasons...


Win8 is #1 because it takes the latest hardware and software and combines them to make something more than the individual parts.

Yeah, it's that good.

 

Thanks for the ref on "How to Secure Erase..."; to others, be very careful with the above corsair ref/link as most (all?) of the download buttons are suspect.

The whole idea of "free" software has become a smelly dungeon. And I'm more than a bit disappointed w/ Corsair on that web page above.

I gave up on the above, and also w/ cnet (what a swamp cnet has become!), and googled, but that's another one you have to be very careful with the results that show up.

Also coming up short (to my surprise) was: Parted Magic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I finally got a safe download of pmagic_2013_05_01.iso (315GB) from Parted Magic | Free software downloads at SourceForge.net

sourceforge tends to be slow (this d/l went at ~1.1MB/sec) and it took ~5 minutes.

Too funny!!

Well I see that earlier today M.S. officially named the revised Win8 as Win8.1 which IMO is a small step in the right direction.

I'll give it 3+ months (after Win8.1 hits the streets) before I even think about paying money for a copy of it. And only if it looks like it will become successful. Only time will tell.

 

Only if it becomes successful? lol... too funny.

It is already successful...

 

Not to the bean counters.

 

Point.

But the bean counters are never happy, are they?

Even with 100 Million 'sold'.


See:
Has Windows 8 Sold 100 Million Copies? Or 57 Million? - Forbes