07-12-2013 12:07 PM
Hi everyone. I have a Crucial m4 60GB, that I bought about a year ago. It has always
had low write speeds. Tested in Crystaldiskmark and AS SSD. attached are the as ssd
results. My write speeds are in the low 100's and my 4k speeds look low too. Are these
benchies normal? Thanks. BTW, my mobo and m4 drive are updated to latest
Solved! Go to Solution.
07-12-2013 01:27 PM - edited 07-12-2013 01:28 PM
The drives write speeds depends upon its size: http://www.crucial.com/pdf/Tech_specs-letter_Cruci
The 64GB drive is rated to 95MB/sec so you're actually faster!
07-12-2013 02:41 PM
That is not a bad benchmark. Take a look at benchmark of good hybrid drive ;-)
07-13-2013 07:40 AM
Wow, those benchies on the hybrid, ouch. Not much better than traditional HDD. Ok, so my drive is not under performing. now i'm just thinking that I could do better with a different brand.
Why such low write speeds compared to a majority of competetors? Is it that the 4K writes mean nothing in real-world performance? I just installed 2 different brands where the writes were on par with the reads (500's) or slightly lower.
07-13-2013 08:20 AM - edited 07-13-2013 08:21 AM
The NAND in SSD's work in parallel. It's like they are effectively raided inside. When you buy the smaller drives there is less NAND and hence less parallisation (is that a word?? ) so they are slower. This is the case for all SSD's that I know of. So ensure you are comparing like sizes. Because the larger M4's have faster writes and the smaller competitors drives will have slower ones so you are not comparing like for like if your comparing to the amrketing specs which will be for the flagship size rather than the specific size you have.
Also, if you are comparing the M4 against current competitors drive do bear in mind that he M4 is not a current drive - the M500 is. So you'd be comparing an older model to a newer one.
Additionally, a lot of competitor drives use sandforce controllers and the specs for those drives are basically a lie. Those are the speeds it can achieve with highly compressible data. The Marvell controller used in the Crucial drives performs consistently with all data. So make sure you use benchmarks with realistically compressed data such as AnvilPro.
Finally, it doesn't matter all that much. Read speed is where it's at! Think about how fast you can supply data for the drive to write. In the UK the fastest readily available internet is 80mbit/sec, approx 10mb/sec and your M4 is 10 times that speed. The fastest blu ray drive on wikipedia is 60mb/sec.
Unless you're into network monitoring, video editing or copying iso's from one drive to another - you probably don't need that much write speed.
Hopefully I've reassured you that your write isn't much of a problem. But if it still is, there's always the M500 (large drive size!)
07-13-2013 12:26 PM
Is it that the 4K writes mean nothing in real-world performance? I just installed 2 different brands where the writes were on par with the reads (500's) or slightly lower.
It is that 4K and 4K-Thread speeds mean everything in real-world experience :-) You can see my hdd has nice sequential speeds but it has really poor 4K and 4KT speeds. Your ssd would give me much, much better real-world experience.
And I guess that with those 500's you were refering to sequential speeds. As targetbsp mentioned many new sandforce driven drives can reach those 500's these days.
07-13-2013 09:25 PM - edited 07-13-2013 09:44 PM
In this thread we was doing some testing using linux (so not using AS SSD tool):
The thread starter was getting about 180-190 MB/s write speeds (M4 128GB) and I was getting between 106 to 110 MB/s with my M4 64GB. Your results are similar to mine.
EDIT: By the way, bogdan mentions 4K speeds being more important.
Here is my hard disk:
# hdparm -I /dev/sdb | grep -e Model Model Number: WDC WD1500HLHX-01JJPV0
# dd if=/dev/zero of=tempfile **bleep**=1M count=1024 conv=fdatasync,notrunc
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 8.07392 s, 133 MB/s
The drive is a 10,000 rpm Western Digital VelociRaptor WD1500 and I'm getting 133 MB/s write speed vs about 108 MB/s with the SSD, but if I'm running the OS from the SSD instead of the Hard Disk, everything is a lot faster.
Please ignore the **bleep* as Crucial forums have an auto-censor that doesn't like the standard abbreviation for Block Size.