Why are my 4k benchmark numbers consistently low?

With the Intel RST 10.6 driver and the stamatisx tweak:




After uninstalling the Intel RST 10.6 driver:




Anything I can do to improve the 4k numbers?

 

Reboot into Windows Safe Mode (hold down F8 while restarting...) and run the benchmarks again to see your 'score' improve.

 

I have no doubt that there will be an improvement in Safe Mode since all the drivers are not loaded, but the score wouldn't be the real one.

 

Yes, but you seem to be just looking for an improvement in the 'scores', period.

Are you comparing this to your previous installation (on a HDD...)?

Do you run encryption/compression on your storage device?

Is this a clean install of Win7? Preceeded with a SE (secure erase) of your SSD?

I think I've asked you these same questions on another thread already???

Obviously, there is something going on with your hardware and specific O/S and software setup that is giving you sub-optimal results/scores.

Again: how does it actually perform in real world tasks?

And to note: running these benchmarks on such a small drive repeatedly is simply making it slower (SE it to get some performance back, if you're able to...).

Good luck.

 

indeed. Very few usage pattern would need high 4K(that is old believe bring over from HDD). Seq is actually more important for typical desktop/laptop use.

 

Maybe in Windows 8 it will be, I don't know. But I thought that 4K is at least same important as random reads. And only then sequential.

 

Noop. Even Windows 10 is not going to change too much, in fact W8 would only make random 4K even less important.

For typical desktop/laptop the two main source of random 4K(mostly read BTW) is :

1. OS boot where a lot of process competing for disk access(but Microsoft is kind of disable this form of boot in W8 and replace it with resume from hibernation)

2. Using page file as memory. Again with enough RAM(ReadyBoost was initially designed for this), unlikely to be a frequent thing.

So what other task you can think of that generate the constant demand of 20M/s random 4K ? When it was 0.1M/s in HDD, it was an issue. At 20M/s it is a problem of the past.

 

Actually it is exactly what I wrote and/or sent an idea of this.

About your question. Emm... Firefox maybe? Launching other applications? All other which makes my HDD struggle anytime not including game's levels load of course.

 

It is not that there is NO 4K RANDOM but how frequent(and all happens at the same time). We are talking about heavy multitasking behaviour. That usually is seen on server(database where there are lots of totally unrelated request to different part of the disk in small chunks, file server to a lessor extend).

On a desktop, say in firefox, usually you click then you wait. You don't click, click, click click click in 20 different tabs. And even you do, the network is the bottleneck, not the disk.

 

I know and agree with what you say. I just don't get any slowdowns usually with my hard drive. The only time I have slowdowns are when this 4K reads are. And it makes me mad. Of course I know that sequential speeds are important but it is not a big deal for me to wait 10 seconds instead of 4-6 because I already know before starting a task which needs sequential speed that I will have to wait. But when system becomes not responding because of opening 2 or 3 apps at a time (for example by a mistake) it makes me... yeah, I already said that. MAD!

 

yup, I understand what you mean. I was referring to the situation that once you jump to SSD, it makes no noticeable difference between 15MB/s random 4K vs 25MB/s. And what is left is the seq. number as that can impact real work(say tiller type of usage).

 

Thanks. 10 char.

 

That would explain why I can't get my boot time to go down, no matter how much tweaking I do. It's about 23 - 25 seconds now, same as with the XT.

 

I saw big improvement after you reinstalled IRST driver.
So I can suggest you to download same driver but F6 version for manual installation. Go to device manager and update Intel controller. Select search manual in folder where you unzipped that downloaded driver.
I don't guarantee it will help.

 

Did you do a clean install? Or is this a cloned installation?

PS. running CDM with 3x 100MB saves a lot of writes.

Same here. That's why I went with the XT.

 

He said it was clean.

I am not good in SSDs but won't this 3x100 be written to SSD's cache instead of nand flash?

 

3x 100 works fine. 3x 50 is too small.

 

iEthos, not useless; the 'point' is to see the scores improve.

Read the whole thread... he has clean Win7 install already and the benchmarks on the first page are 'horrible' with IRST installed...

sigh...

Please stop double posting too (use one reply to multiple people). Thanks.

 

Wait, what since when? Sequential means squat, plain and simple. You can have crappy sequential but fast 4k and your system will perform well. In any case I don't think it matters much these days really does it?

edit: just found this discussion http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...rformance-sequential-numbers-pointless-6.html

And no real resolution, lol.

It's the same way people are so fascinated with SATA III when in reality it means squat for most users anyhow.

 

It is in the context of slow random 4K SSD vs fast random 4K SSD. Even the slowest like Kingston is not showing much a difference in terms of snappiness.

 

I agree. Considering I've run the gamut of earlier models: OCZ Vertex 2, Intel X25-M (desktop 120GB), Kingston V+100 (netbook 96GB), WD SiliconEdge Blue (notebook 256GB) and there is little difference between them noticeable at least for daily regular use.

 

iEthos, some people go to even more extremes to see the 'scores' improve than simply running them in Safe Mode. Not only is this useless (I agree with you...) it is useless to run most benchmarks in 'normal' mode too (why? because benchmarks do not indicate how a component will work in real world usage accurately).

And, I repeat: even if it's to a dozen different people - use a single post to respond (you can even use the multi-quote button to make your reply more readable. This is not my request: it is the forums rules you have to follow.

Thanks.