Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Corsair Force 3 90gb write slower than HDD

Tags:
  • Hard Drives
  • Corsair Force
  • Storage
Last response: in Storage
Share
October 26, 2012 11:02:41 PM

Hello, I have a Corsair Force 3 90gb. I have only found ONE other person with my exact problem. http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1693595 My drive has a decent read speed but the write speed is terrible. Sometimes benching below 70MB.
Unfortunately over they they chalked it up to him running on an older sata 2. That is not my problem.
I have an Asus p8p67 pro 3.1 motherboard. I do have the drive connected to the Intel sata 3 port.

I have tried using the other controllers sata 3 port
I have tried a different cable
I have updated Intel RST and also uninstalled it, all with the exact same speeds.
I have ensured write cache is enabled, I have also tried disabling it.
My drive is only 44% full
I have tried both AS SSD and Crystal Disk Mark. When switching to a different test data I get spec read around 512 seq is 434. Doing standard test I get around seq 215 read / 80 write. Benches everywhere else I see are showing my read is about normal, however my write should be closer to 120-140.

I am at a complete loss as to what I should try next, any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I have been searching for 2 days with no solution yet, and I really don't want to have to try to re-install windows.

My last run on crystaldisk mark was
seq 215/79
512k 203/71
4k 26/64
4k qd32 128/64

Asus P8P67 Pro 3.1
2500k 4.5ghz
Corsair 90gb Force 3
1 WD Black 640gb
2 WD Green 1tb
2 WD Green 800gb
2x EVGA GTX SC 670 4GB
8GB ddr2 1600

More about : corsair force 90gb write slower hdd

a c 104 G Storage
October 27, 2012 12:24:11 AM

Hi there,

Your Corsair SSD should be placed on the Gray SATA_1 port and the WD black on the Gray SATA_2. The other drives depending on what you are using them for. Also the SATA configuration in the BIOS needs be set on AHCI. Only use the Marvel Navy Blue controller ports if you run out of Intel PCH ports.

I don't find an actual test of the Force 3 but the Neutron has actual test read speeds of 517MB/s and write speeds of 357MB/s
m
0
l
October 27, 2012 2:00:05 AM

John_VanKirk said:
Hi there,

Your Corsair SSD should be placed on the Gray SATA_1 port and the WD black on the Gray SATA_2. The other drives depending on what you are using them for. Also the SATA configuration in the BIOS needs be set on AHCI. Only use the Marvel Navy Blue controller ports if you run out of Intel PCH ports.

I don't find an actual test of the Force 3 but the Neutron has actual test read speeds of 517MB/s and write speeds of 357MB/s


Here is one of the benchmarks on the 90gb I found http://vr-zone.com/articles/corsair-force-3-90gb-ssd-dr... This is also my fault, I bought it before reading more about SSD tech and I should have gone for a gt. On the linked bench for seq it got 212 read and 139 write using crystaldiskmark. So my read is actually right on, the write speed is leaving a lot to be desired though.

I am currently using the grey Intel sata (3) 6gb ports for both my ssd and WD Black, as they are both primary drives. The other 6 ports (including) the Marvell 6g are being utilized by other drives. I do also have the Bios set to AHCI as well.

Just got the wife a new Kingston Hyper X 3k, making me feel really bad about not reading more about synchronous nand vs asynchronous nand now lol. I really hope the drive isn't defective. Is there anything else I could try to rectify the speed problem? It isn't normally noticeable, but when you are moving a file to the drive it is for sure something you can see as far as real world performance is concerned.
I know Sandforce doesn't play nicely with things like crystaldiskmark due to the incompressible data, but I should be getting at least another another 40-60MB
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 104 G Storage
October 27, 2012 3:48:58 PM

When in doubt, check it with another "meter".

Why not download and install HD Tune (Pro)
www.hdtune.com
and see if you get similar transfer speeds across the drive. You can also run the Error check to see if there are any bad sectors identified or any SMART issues.

For completeness, also download and run
http://diskat.net/download-en.html
which is a small GUI applet that will tell you that your disk sectors are alligned as they should be.

Other than proper conncections, and checking the SSD itself, there's not anything you can do to increse it's speed.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
October 27, 2012 4:33:52 PM

Is this the drive you have your OS installed on? Test it bare with nothing on it.
m
0
l
October 27, 2012 8:43:58 PM

John_VanKirk said:
When in doubt, check it with another "meter".

Why not download and install HD Tune (Pro)
www.hdtune.com
and see if you get similar transfer speeds across the drive. You can also run the Error check to see if there are any bad sectors identified or any SMART issues.

For completeness, also download and run
http://diskat.net/download-en.html
which is a small GUI applet that will tell you that your disk sectors are alligned as they should be.

Other than proper conncections, and checking the SSD itself, there's not anything you can do to increse it's speed.


Alright I ran the transfer test on HD TUNE. Also, the alignment looks alright on all the drives, cept it couldn't read my E drive for whatever reason. The smart values also came out alright. AS SSD and Crystaldiskmark both show around the same values, with AS SSD being slightly less on speed. Should the write/transfer speed be even across the test like the read? Also I ran a quick error check, and it came back alright as well. (Im running a full error check now just in case)
m
0
l
October 27, 2012 8:49:18 PM

jitpublisher said:
Is this the drive you have your OS installed on? Test it bare with nothing on it.


Yeah, this is the drive my OS is installed on. I can honestly say, If it comes down to reinstalling ill just wait until I am about to replace it with another drive with synchronous nand. The read works fine, so I still get 90% of the benefit of having a ssd. It just falls flat when it comes to writing.
m
0
l
a c 104 G Storage
October 27, 2012 10:33:40 PM

Run the HD Tune Pro again but run the READ Benchmark Test across the whole drive drive. You can copy the screenshot using the button on the toolbar giving you the whole image. You can't run the Write test without wiping out your data, so don't do that.
m
0
l
October 27, 2012 11:31:34 PM

John_VanKirk said:
Run the HD Tune Pro again but run the READ Benchmark Test across the whole drive drive. You can copy the screenshot using the button on the toolbar giving you the whole image. You can't run the Write test without wiping out your data, so don't do that.

m
0
l
October 31, 2012 11:11:16 AM

one_with_shadows said:
Here is one of the benchmarks on the 90gb I found http://vr-zone.com/articles/corsair-force-3-90gb-ssd-dr... This is also my fault, I bought it before reading more about SSD tech and I should have gone for a gt. On the linked bench for seq it got 212 read and 139 write using crystaldiskmark. So my read is actually right on, the write speed is leaving a lot to be desired though.

I am currently using the grey Intel sata (3) 6gb ports for both my ssd and WD Black, as they are both primary drives. The other 6 ports (including) the Marvell 6g are being utilized by other drives. I do also have the Bios set to AHCI as well.

Just got the wife a new Kingston Hyper X 3k, making me feel really bad about not reading more about synchronous nand vs asynchronous nand now lol. I really hope the drive isn't defective. Is there anything else I could try to rectify the speed problem? It isn't normally noticeable, but when you are moving a file to the drive it is for sure something you can see as far as real world performance is concerned.
I know Sandforce doesn't play nicely with things like crystaldiskmark due to the incompressible data, but I should be getting at least another another 40-60MB


True Sandforce might have some slow performance with in compressible data but it makes up for it through its longevity by saving the burn cycles. Other drives might seem to be slightly faster but Sandforce would last longer than most
m
0
l
November 2, 2012 8:59:18 AM

one_with_shadows said:
Here is one of the benchmarks on the 90gb I found http://vr-zone.com/articles/corsair-force-3-90gb-ssd-dr... This is also my fault, I bought it before reading more about SSD tech and I should have gone for a gt. On the linked bench for seq it got 212 read and 139 write using crystaldiskmark. So my read is actually right on, the write speed is leaving a lot to be desired though.

I am currently using the grey Intel sata (3) 6gb ports for both my ssd and WD Black, as they are both primary drives. The other 6 ports (including) the Marvell 6g are being utilized by other drives. I do also have the Bios set to AHCI as well.

Just got the wife a new Kingston Hyper X 3k, making me feel really bad about not reading more about synchronous nand vs asynchronous nand now lol. I really hope the drive isn't defective. Is there anything else I could try to rectify the speed problem? It isn't normally noticeable, but when you are moving a file to the drive it is for sure something you can see as far as real world performance is concerned.
I know Sandforce doesn't play nicely with things like crystaldiskmark due to the incompressible data, but I should be getting at least another another 40-60MB


sandforce compensates for the in compressible data speed with its longevity by saving cycles. Its the difference between the 100 m sprint vs marathon. Sandforce is a marathon runner than a 100 m dash
m
0
l
!