• 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.

SSD & Prefetch

wouldn't prefetch wear "prematurely" the ssd with all that writing?
 
http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/showthread.php?t=340129
Generally superfetch/prefetch are not needed for SSD and can wear them out faster as there WILL be more required writes of smaller bits more often so TRIM has to take effect more often to prevent the wear which can lead to higher write amplification especially if the drive is in a more % used state(which degrades life and performance)
I have tried on, and turned off and write amplify is higher one for sure, performance wise no difference in my case.

A whole crud load of small files will hurt life just as much as a smaller number of large writes, the controller is designed to deal with larger ones(easier to shift where needed) vs a bunch of small ones which may need to be trimmed more often or garbage collected as required, part of the same reason why they advise to turn off hibernation it just sucks up to much % of the drive to often and will degrade life faster.
 
leSLIe said:
wouldn't prefetch wear "prematurely" the ssd with all that writing?
Click to expand...

No. If you purchased a modern 256GB or larger SSD you should not worry at all about wearing the drive out since you will not be writing 50GB every single day for 5+ years.
 
but even with say a 256gb drive if you only have say 15% of it unused then then end result can be there is a lot of extra writes happening to it as it will be shifting things around to begin with every time you open a game or whatever, the newer drive are more intelligent in regards to wear leveling and such, however, they also do not last as long(depending of course on the type of flash it uses)

Here, I have a 60gb Agility 3 which I use for OS have 1-2 games on it, have shifted what I can off of it, been using it now for ~3 years or so? Currently it is sitting at 99% life with close to 90k GB written to controller 50k to flash, This drive as stated is more or less OS specific and I shifted what I could off of it to reduce writes and reduce it needing to move things(life and performance) with a larger drive that is newer more advanced this will not matter as much, but hey, there is 0 performance benefit from having it on really(when you are talking 300+ mb/sec of speed) it was made for mechanical drives to be snappier feel, SSD truly do not need this :p so why keep it on if it can hurt performance(possibly) or lifetime(yes if the newest most advanced drive or even some of the older ones Crucial M4 example)
 
The whole point - the only point - of prefetch and SuperFetch was to load programs from a slow hard drive to RAM before you actually run those programs, so you wouldn't have to wait so long for those programs to launch. SSDs load programs so fast that there is no reason to have prefetch or SuperFetch on. You essentially got an SSD so you wouldn't need to use prefetch or SuperFetch.

A default Windows 7 install will disable prefetch and SuperFetch on SSDs.
 
should, mine was enabled on a fresh install though was 7 home premium 64 non sp1 version and Agility 3 almost at the start of their release might be why?
 
Here's an example of prefetch using 2x SSD RAID0 and a simple 16MB executable that randomly jumps from one 4k page to another. Disk operation was monitored by Sysinternals DiskMon software.

First of all with prefetch disabled.
ivmn.png


Windows uses the classic page faulting technique to load memory, in this example Windows reads 64 sectors at a time, 32kB. Read speeds at 32k QD1 average around 125MB/s. These are not aligned so as the program progresses we end up with a lot of smaller chunks of 28k to 4k which have even lower read speeds. So it took ~0.01 seconds to launch the program and the program itself took ~0.2 seconds to complete.


Now with prefetching enabled.
y7x2.png


The launch takes longer because unlike the previous example the whole program is read into memory before execution begins. DiskMon shows chunks of 4096 sectors, 2MB, being read and giving read speeds in excess of 800MB/s. The time to complete is 600% faster. The executable itself runs 70 times faster and completes in less time than a typical quantum which means it likely stays on the same core using the same CPU cache.

After the first loading, chances are if the RAM has not been hit hard that subsequent runs will have a lot of the data already in RAM so disk effects will be minimal, that is regardless of whether or not prefetch is used.
 
CPL0 said:
After the first loading, chances are if the RAM has not been hit hard that subsequent runs will have a lot of the data already in RAM so disk effects will be minimal, that is regardless of whether or not prefetch is used.
Click to expand...

wow!


And how about the Internet Browers cache? Should I move it away from the SSD? :confused: There are a lot of small writes in there
 
I second on the internet cache, may be a lot of small writes but that is something that will read once it is written, SSD do not have issues when it comes to reading, its the writing that takes away their life but even then its all on the size of the writes and the frequency, more modern drives have worse life(smaller nm of flash size) but also by far a more advanced controller to make sure they only write what truly needs writing and they are usually quite good at this.

It does really depend on the size of drive, the type of flash it uses, and most certainly on the amount of free space left, if you leave enough free space say 20% or so, you can use the drive for years for pretty much everything(well not defrag and avoid benchmarking constantly of course) before you notice any significant performance drops.

I use Ccleaner every month or so to clean crud out that's all I ever do and performance is as good if not slightly better then even the day I got it, and again I use my system probably a good 12+hours per day more or less all year long have been for ~3+ years no complaints though I do only have a 60gb drive so I shifted things around some, larger drive means less need to shift should also mean less stuff is being written that doesn't need to be, regardless, still 99% life left on mine heavy average use since I owned it.

Generally the makers strive for ~10 years average use(which is well beyond what most use it anyways)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top