• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Should I return my Sandisk SSD?

F

fantazio

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
203
Hi guys,

I haven't upgraded my computer in a long time and decided to get an SSD for my new build. Here's what I got:

SanDisk Extreme SSD 120 GB SATA 6.0 Gb-s2.5-Inch Solid State Drive SDSSDX-120G-G25

It does seem very fast compared to my old hard drive, but after I ran some benchmarks and looked at comparable priced SSDs (Crucial m4, Samsung 840, OCZ Vertex 4) it does seem like my SSD is benchmarking pretty low.

It is advertised to be read/write 500+mb/s, but that doesn't seem to be the case according to benchmarks. It'll be kind of a pain to get a new hard drive and reinstall everything, so I just wanted to get some opinions on whether or not these scores seem slow for a $~100 128gb SSD -- Thanks guys

o1OB7.png
 
I forgot to mention that I am using an ASROCK H77 Pro4-M motherboard and Windows 8 x64, if that has anything to do with it. The SSD is plugged into SATA 3 slot using cable that came with the mobo. Seems kind of high quality with metal locks. Would trying a different cable be a good idea?
 
Answered.

edit: Sorry, I had asked if you had it on SATA3 controller, Intel version, and you answered before I could post, so I deleted it.
 
Last edited:
It appears to be properly aligned and AHCI.

Either the dirver is not good, the SATA controller is not good, or the OS is not good.
 
its probably the sata controller, because i have the 240 extreme version and the write speed is about doubles that of the OP. Its running on an Intel sata3 controller; When i had it on a marvel controller with sata3, it was running even slower than sata2 port.
 
Thanks for your replies

The driver does seem to be old. It's from Microsoft 6/21/2006 which is quite old, but I checked Sandisk's site and they do not have drivers for SSDs. Is there anyway for me to test of it's the SATA controller, besides getting another SSD?
 
seems like your controller is an intel, so dont forget to install Intel® Rapid Storage and Asmedia.

- 2 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s connectors by Intel® H77, support RAID (RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 5, RAID 10, Intel® Rapid Storage and Intel® Smart Response Technology), NCQ, AHCI and "Hot Plug" functions
- 2 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s connectors by ASMedia ASM1061, support NCQ, AHCI and "Hot Plug" functions (SATA3_A1 connector is shared with eSATA3 port)

make sure its plugged into the intel sata slot.
 
Once you have installed the Intel Rapid Storage program, if the device is plugged into an intel sata port. The drive itself will show up in the program, it is a good indication that its in the right port.
 
fantazio said:
It is advertised to be read/write 500+mb/s, but that doesn't seem to be the case according to benchmarks. It'll be kind of a pain to get a new hard drive and reinstall everything, so I just wanted to get some opinions on whether or not these scores seem slow for a $~100 128gb SSD -- Thanks guys
Click to expand...

#1 running a benchmark on your drive while its also your system drive isn't a completely accurate picture because the benchmark is contending with any Windows processes accessing the disk.
#2 when you see an advertisement for "Up to 500MB/s" they aren't talking about the 120GB model, they're talking about the 256GB and 512GB versions. This is somewhat misleading unfortunately.
#3 microsoft's AHCI driver is not "old" because it has a 2006 datestamp.
 
Last edited:
aznever said:
seems like your controller is an intel, so dont forget to install Intel® Rapid Storage and Asmedia.

- 2 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s connectors by Intel® H77, support RAID (RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 5, RAID 10, Intel® Rapid Storage and Intel® Smart Response Technology), NCQ, AHCI and "Hot Plug" functions
- 2 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s connectors by ASMedia ASM1061, support NCQ, AHCI and "Hot Plug" functions (SATA3_A1 connector is shared with eSATA3 port)

make sure its plugged into the intel sata slot.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. I didn't even know that I had two different SATA 3 ports! I will get that software and install the SSD to the Intel port. Thanks!
 
odditory said:
#1 running a benchmark on your drive while its also your system drive isn't a completely accurate picture because the benchmark is contending with Windows processes access the disk.

#2 where was the 120GB model of this disk advertised as 500MB/s R/W? It wasn't. They're talking about the 256GB+ versions.

#3 microsoft's AHCI driver is not "old" because it has a 2006 datestamp.

In fairness the advertising is somewhat deceptive in that you'll often see "Up to 500MB/s" and what they really mean is "for this line of drives" .. which includes the bigger sizes.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments.

#2 -- yes it is advertised to be 550mb/s for the 128gb version -- look here http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006EKJCWM/ref=oh_details_o02_s03_i04


mY1ib.png


You're right that it says "up to" which may be misleading.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Yeah that's total nonsense on their part. And in the case of "up to" for the 120GB its assuming highly compressible data. Unfortunate they play these games.

Your numbers in the OP are about right for a Sandisk 120. If you wanted to see higher sequentials youd have to step up to the 240GB model. You may see slightly better writespeed and 4k randoms by installing latest Intel RST as was suggested.
 
I changed to the Intel SATA III port and installed Rapid Storage. I got slightly better scores, at least for reading.

YI5jw.png
 
odditory said:
Yeah that's total nonsense on their part. And in the case of "up to" for the 120GB its assuming highly compressible data. Unfortunate they play these games.

Your numbers in the OP are about right for a Sandisk 120. If you wanted to see higher sequentials youd have to step up to the 240GB model. You may see slightly better writespeed and 4k randoms by installing latest Intel RST as was suggested.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I had no clue that there is a speed difference between sizes. That probably explains my confusion about thinking my benchmarks were low. If these are good for 120, then I guess I'll keep it :) Thanks
 
fantazio said:
Thanks. I had no clue that there is a speed difference between sizes. That probably explains my confusion about thinking my benchmarks were low. If these are good for 120, then I guess I'll keep it :) Thanks
Click to expand...

There are speed differences between sizes but they advertise the speed based on the size so there's nothing misleading there.

The write numbers and read access time seem a bit off in the benchmark you post, but I guess there could be a few circumstances that cause that.

What's misleading is the benchmark program itself as it uses incompressible data. Ask yourself a serious question... how often do you write highly-compressed data to your SSD from a source that can access data as fast as your SSD can write? (I.e., from either memory or another SSD.) And even in those circumstances you're getting imperceptibly fast speeds.
 
jwcalla said:
There are speed differences between sizes but they advertise the speed based on the size so there's nothing misleading there.

The write numbers and read access time seem a bit off in the benchmark you post, but I guess there could be a few circumstances that cause that.

What's misleading is the benchmark program itself as it uses incompressible data. Ask yourself a serious question... how often do you write highly-compressed data to your SSD from a source that can access data as fast as your SSD can write? (I.e., from either memory or another SSD.) And even in those circumstances you're getting imperceptibly fast speeds.
Click to expand...

Did you see the screenshot I posted above from the Amazon listing? They are advertising 550mb/s for the 120gb version, which is why I think it's quite misleading to put that. I realize that 'real world' will be different than synthetic benchmarks, but I'm not getting anywhere near 500mb/s. Oh well. I am happy with what I have.
 
fantazio said:
Did you see the screenshot I posted above from the Amazon listing? They are advertising 550mb/s for the 120gb version, which is why I think it's quite misleading to put that. I realize that 'real world' will be different than synthetic benchmarks, but I'm not getting anywhere near 500mb/s. Oh well. I am happy with what I have.
Click to expand...

How do you know you're not getting anywhere near 500 MB/s on some workloads?

Yeah, the advertised "up to" numbers are the best case scenarios... but they do happen during regular use.
 
Did you verify the drive has the new firmware according to the website? Just in case...

Do that, reboot, leave the PC idle for 30+ minutes (so the drive can do cleanup routines), then run the benchmark again.


Run some other benchmarks too...
 
Last edited:
No, there's no problem with CDM. Its an issue of highly compressible data (basically a stream of zeroes) with ATTO, which is why its generally considered a silly test for SSD's especially of the sandforce variety.

Don't get too hung up on the sequential #'s. The magic metric for windows "responsiveness" is in the 4K performance, especially 4K writes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top