This SSD speed is correct?

I have this ssd in my laptop:

KINGSTON SSDNOW MS200 SERIES 120GB 2.5 MSATA
SSD CAPACITY - 120GB
SATA 3.0 INTERFACE - YES
WRITE SPEED MBYTES/SEC - 520
READ SPEED MBYTES/SEC - 550


My laptop is MSI GE60 2OE-003US 15.6

 

Looks close enough to me.

See:
Kingston SSDNow mS200 / RunCore Pro V 120GB mSATA SSDs review: ideal upgrade for laptops? - AS SSD (subscores) | Hardware.Info United Kingdom


Considering it is using half the channels the SF controller is able to use in 2.5" SATA drives...


Hope this helps.

 

So I do not understand why the page to buy it put speeds of 520 and 550 if you can not get even half.

 

Your SSD is mSATA, correct? I am guessing that your system uses SATA rev. 2 for the mSATA slot, capping the speed at 300 MB/s. My system has something similar. The main drive and the Ultrabay drive can run at 6 Gbit/s (600 MB/s) SATA rev. 3 bandwidth, but the mSATA slot is limited to 3 Gbit/s (300 MB/s) SATA rev. 2, since Intel only allowed two 6 Gbit/s SATA ports for systems using Ivy bridge processors, and they're both filled.

 

Yes, is mSata. But my processor is Haswell, not ivy bridge. ARK | Intel® Core

 

That however doesn't answer the question as to whether the mSATA is wired on SATA II or SATA III.

 

Is the MSI mSATA slot SATA 3?
The advertised sequential R/W speeds of 550/520 were achieved in Tiller's link with ATTO. That's the benchmark the SSD manufacturers, generally, use to rate the drives. Is your drive completely empty of data? Silly question, it might seem. But that's how drives are tested and reviewed. To find out how it will really perform you need to find reviews that go a little farther with data on the drive.

 

it is testing incompressible data, and it match what tiller posted.
Try to test other file format fill 0 or 1, or bench with hd tune.

 

Yes what Tiller is saying is that Crystaldisk uses incompressible data for its test, and Sandforce drives struggle with incompressible data, slowing to about half of their speed with compressible data. This is why a lot of testing websites publish 2 sets of numbers for Sandforce drives (like intel 520). If you test your drive with ATTO, you should see speeds close to the published numbers. I wouldn't get too caught up in benchmarks, though it's tempting. Does the drive feel snappy doing what you normally do? If it doesn't feel like a big improvement over an HDD, then maybe I'd get worried.

Also, if you read the review Tiller linked to, you'll see that despite the low CrystalDisk score, the drives do very well in Passmark testing and are still recommended. They don't test as well as the Plextor M5M, but the reviewer thinks you wouldn't notice a big difference. Again to ease your mind, download ATTO and make sure they test close to 500MB/sec, but then just use the thing and then decide what you think.

 

I think that particular laptop has only SATAII for the mSATA port. I don't remember the reason but it was something to do with how there are pre-made configs with RAID0 mSATA SSDs.

 

I think Marksman30K is right. It should be something to do with the interface version to which this SSD is getting linked with. I am getting the advertised speeds even with half the drive filled up. There are so many factors which can hamper the SSD speeds. According to xbitlabs kingston SSDnow is rated quite good. chk this out - http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/display/kingston-ssdnow-v300_8.html#sect0

 

the ge60 with haswell has msata wired to sata 3, its a sandforce problem