PDA

View Full Version : Poor SSD Speeds Kingston SSDNow V200+ =(




Yamcha
Mar 24, 2012, 11:09 AM
Hi Guys,

Just yesterday I installed a Kingston 60GB SSDnow V200+ on my Mac Mini 2011 which is supposed to get reads of 535MB and Writes of 460MB But I'm not even getting anything close to that..

I am able to boot in 17 seconds, applications & games do launch quickly, but for some reason the reads and writes I'm seeing on Xbench or Black Magic Speed test are very poor..

Should I be worried? I already have TRIM enabled..
http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/1414/screenshot20120324at100.png



Poki
Mar 24, 2012, 11:28 AM
Altough it's still much faster than normal hard drives, it's indeed pretty slow for an SSD. Are you sure it's a SATA3-SSD (too lazy to google..)? If it is, I would reboot and redo the tests with all applications closed. If the speeds don't go up, it would be wise to look for other benchmarks of this SSD. If they're faster - return it for a new one if you want the speed (yeah, I know, much work...), if not, than you've bought a slow SSD.

philipma1957
Mar 24, 2012, 11:54 AM
there are a lot of reasons for the scores. first reason is the 60gb ssd size is slower then the bigger sizes.

look at the thumbnail it shows I have a 6gb (sata III) jack but I am running at 3gb speed. why?

Because I have a 3gb Sata II ssd. so look at your link and see if you are at 6gb or 3gb is this your drive?


http://www.neweggbusiness.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820139991

all those high numbers say up to not normal results and they are 280 read 260 write in sata

ii mode

http://www.kingston.com/datasheets/svp200s3_us.pdf

kinston website this is the same as a mushkin or a vertex agility they all use sand force 2281 controllers even the intel series 520 these are all the same with some software tweaks. all of them the 180gb and the 240gb test faster then the 80gb

Yamcha
Mar 24, 2012, 12:02 PM
there are a lot of reasons for the scores. first reason is the 60gb ssd size is slower then the bigger sizes.

Can't be, as I checked the kingston website for reads and writes that the 60GB is capable of, and it says 535MB & 460MB (SATA 6gb/s)

Poki
Mar 24, 2012, 12:08 PM
Never trust the advertisements.

Look on google for other benchmark of the 60GB SSD you use and compare it to your benchmarks.

Yamcha
Mar 24, 2012, 12:10 PM
According to the benchmarks here, It's performing as advertised..

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-60gb-benchmark-review,3137-4.html

philipma1957
Mar 24, 2012, 12:34 PM
According to the benchmarks here, It's performing as advertised..

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-60gb-benchmark-review,3137-4.html

in windows with specific bench program that can't be used for mac.
i added more to my post above what link speed at you at 6gb or 3gb. I moved to my other mac mini look at the link speed vs the negotiated link speed 6 gig and 6 gig. the drive is a 240gb mushkin. look at the xbench scores for it

Yamcha
Mar 24, 2012, 12:40 PM
in windows with specific bench program that can't be used for mac.
i added more to my post above what link speed at you at 6gb or 3gb. I moved to my other mac mini look at the link speed vs the negotiated link speed 6 gig and 6 gig. the drive is a 240gb mushkin

Thanks for reply, according to about this mac the link speed is 6GB

Screenshot:
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/9091/screenshot20120324at113.png

philipma1957
Mar 24, 2012, 12:43 PM
good at least one possible reason is taken care of. I posted my scores for xbench on my other mini that has a 240gb mushkin they are better. in fact they are better by more then can be accounted for since the link is good and 60gb is not that much slower then 240gb. how full is your ssd?

I never use trim I have read trim and sandforce are not the best of friends. IIRC owc and some other ssd people have said do not use trim with sandforce.

Maybe shortcut3d can help as he has a lot more sandforce ssds then i do.

Yamcha
Mar 24, 2012, 12:57 PM
good at least one possible reason is taken care of. I posted my scores for xbench on my other mini that has a 240gb mushkin they are better. in fact they are better by more then can be accounted for since the link is good and 60gb is not that much slower then 240gb. how full is your ssd?

I never use trim I have read trim and sandforce are not the best of friends. IIRC owc and some other ssd people have said do not use trim with sandforce.

Maybe shortcut3d can help as he has a lot more sandforce ssds then i do.

I've got 13GB of free space currently, also when I first installed Mac OSX Lion I tried the benchmarks without TRIM but I didn't see any change..

Thanks for help, I'll try and contact the user, also contacted Kingston about it..

ActionableMango
Sep 26, 2012, 02:00 PM
I've got 13GB of free space currently, also when I first installed Mac OSX Lion I tried the benchmarks without TRIM but I didn't see any change..

Thanks for help, I'll try and contact the user, also contacted Kingston about it..

I'm way late to this thread, but just in case you still have a slow SSD, according to this article there is a firmware update that fixes it:

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=6488&review=kingston+ssdnow+v200+ssd+7mm

theSeb
Sep 26, 2012, 06:16 PM
Oops, didn't check post date.