Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SSD Performance Issues

Tags:
  • SSD
  • Storage
Last response: in Storage
Share
a b G Storage
December 1, 2011 9:37:18 PM

Hey there!

I have a somewhat strange question, and I am looking to see if anyone can shed some light...


I have a Kingston HyperX SATA3 (6Gb/s) 120GB Sandforce based SSD coupled with my Sabertooth 990FX which is absolutely amazing. However, I have found out that when I plug a large format spinny drive into one of my available SATA3 ports (I have 6 total) my system is a lot more sluggish.

It is about a 10sec difference on boot, just by plugging the HDD in, even if the drive is blank, and I ran Crystal on it, which gave it about 380MB/s read, and 74-120MB/s Write, which is a lot slower than the 555/520 that I should be getting.

Is the slower interface of the HDD's causing the bus to slow down to that speed?

If I use the JMicron SATA2 controller for the HDD will I still see the performance drop?

If I put my SATA DVD drive on the SATA6 bus will it cause it to slow down further?

Are there settings I should have set up to keep this from happening?

Any ideas / thoughts / experience that any of you have had?

Thanks in advance!

More about : ssd performance issues

a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 11:47:15 AM

How strange!

I'd launch the "spinny drive" and the DVD into the other controllers SATA2 ports and see if that has same crippling affect on the SSD.

As for the reason or settings no idea. Could be a bug in the controller implementation. Having the latest bios may have a fix.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 1:16:47 PM

Alrighty update time.

Previously I had the SSD on Sata6_1 the HDD's on Sata6_2&3, and the Opti drive on Sata6_4

I have since switched the 2 HDD's off of the SataIII bus completely, so they are now on Sata3_1&2

For some reason this has further slowed my boot time.

The part that really confuses me is that there is nothing on the HDD's I just installed them because I was running low on space on the SSD.

I have Sata6 set to AHCI, is this what I need?
m
0
l
Related resources
December 2, 2011 7:02:53 PM

I'm not to familiar with your board but, I know there are limitations on just how fast the combined sata III ports will go (on all boards). For instance with my board (Asus Rampage III Formula) the newer/faster sata III SSD's can have a hard time reaching their top speed due to the controllers one PCI lane limitation. If yours are limited to the total speed of what your SSD can produce, that could be a factor.

I did a quick search and this thread http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/M4-64GB-RAID0-on-990FX-performance-issue/td-p/59800/page/2 seems to suggest that if you go into bios and enable raid 5 (not necessarily use it, just enable it) your maximum combined speed capability will increase substantially.

I don't know if this will help but its worth a shot and yes, AHCI is correct :D 
m
0
l
a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 7:43:15 PM

Hmm, that sounds pretty solid, I will have to try that when I get home.

It seems kind of strange that it would be having issues with combined throughtput because as of right now there is no data on the HDD. But it is possible the SB is reserving lanes for that drive.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 7:51:24 PM

the 10sec on boot may be post time for the drives to spin up... but somehow I dobut it. Unplug them and see if you get the performance back. This may be something to ask the manufacturer about.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 8:06:41 PM

The extra 10 seconds is after POST. once the OS is actually loading.

There is no data on the HDD, so it shouldn't be waiting for it to spin up, but it is possible.

Kingston is currently building a test bench in their labs with the same config and seeing if they can duplicate so I should find out about that soon.
m
0
l
December 2, 2011 8:35:56 PM

And this?

itzdanielp said:
I ran Crystal on it, which gave it about 380MB/s read, and 74-120MB/s Write, which is a lot slower than the 555/520 that I should be getting.


I think the suggestion is at least worth a try. :D 
m
0
l
a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 8:43:27 PM

That's exactly what doesn't make sense. I've been on and off the phone with the Kingston engineers a couple times now. seems like they can't duplicate the problem, which points towards my board. Since they are using the same hardware as me.
m
0
l
December 2, 2011 9:10:52 PM

Well look, I didn't come here to argue only to help. The possible solution I pointed out has nothing to do with Kingston and everything to do with your board. And to be fair I don't know if it will work, only that it looks to me like it might.

Have a good Day! :D 
m
0
l
a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 9:17:49 PM

It has nothing to do with me not wanting to change anything, or that I don't believe you.

And as soon as I get off of work, I am going to try exactly what you suggested. I am trying to figure out more what went wrong than just a fix.

I appreciate your help though.
m
0
l
December 2, 2011 9:33:05 PM

No problem. Let me know if it helps. good luck!
m
0
l
a b G Storage
December 2, 2011 9:40:32 PM

Will do, thanks again
m
0
l
October 20, 2012 2:57:50 PM

I also have the Kingston ssd and the asus sabertooth 990fx and it is the slowest of all pcs to boot in my house. It is very frustrating and led me to purchase a different and cheaper mobo for my other amd setup.

My family all plays WOW and this pc has the slowest load times, but has'better' hardware. I am going to use the suggestion of raid 5 and see if that does anything for me. This pc also is the least used and has the least amount of programs on it. I understand there are faster ssd's on the market, but I think it is the board.
m
0
l
!