Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Air

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 30, 2011, 11:50 PM   #26
jamesryanbell
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
jamesryanbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnhurley View Post
Sounds like the samsung is a stronger performer than even I was aware of!

Does your machine run fast enough for you? That's the bottom line right?

Just enjoy it and have fun and don't worry about arbitrary benchmark results.
I wish I'd have bought a used Samsung 256GB drive now off of eBay for less money. It's way, way faster from everything I read.

Does it run fast enough for me? That's relative. For almost $500 out the door, I'd hope it'd be way faster than what I'm seeing. The bottom line is that I want way more speed than stock, faster boot up times, and more storage. I got one of the three. Wouldn't you think I'd be able to reproduce something remotely close to manufacturer claims? I've run AJA (works now for some reason), Black Magic, and XBench, and all of them produce numbers that aren't even remotely close.

I'll try. haha. It's just a money thing I guess.
__________________
iPhone 5S White/Silver 64GB AT&T
iPad Air White/Silver 16GB AT&T
MBA 11" / 27" ACD / ATV3
jamesryanbell is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2011, 12:20 AM   #27
SDColorado
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesryanbell View Post
I have to be honest...

I really feel like I got hosed. If this was a $100 drive, then "whatever" would be my attitude....
I don't blame you. But I just don't get the numbers you are posting. If you look at the figures I posted for Black Magic, which was the 5MB test, they are pretty much dead on the same as the 5MB line in the QuickBench scores I posted. I mean they are within .10's, so I am not sure where OWC seems to think Black Magic is somehow being incredibly optimistic as opposed to QuickBench.

Even running the test on my MBP I get read and write scores both of 110-ish on my 750GB 7200rpm HDD.

You could ask OWC if there is some setting I am missing when I run QuickBench, but otherwise I am not sure how they explain how the results between Black Magic and QuickBench are statistically the same on my drive.

I don't know. I am the furthest thing from an expert when it comes to SSD drives. So maybe I am missing something.
__________________
'10 6-Core Mac Pro 3.33GHz '12 17" MBP 2.5GHz '12 15" MBP 2.6 GHz '14 13" MBP 2.8 GHz iPad3 64GB WiFi +LTE iPhone 5 64GB
SDColorado is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2011, 12:27 AM   #28
jamesryanbell
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
jamesryanbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDColorado View Post
I don't blame you. But I just don't get the numbers you are posting. If you look at the figures I posted for Black Magic, which was the 5MB test, they are pretty much dead on the same as the 5MB line in the QuickBench scores I posted. I mean they are within .10's, so I am not sure where OWC seems to think Black Magic is somehow being incredibly optimistic as opposed to QuickBench.

Even running the test on my MBP I get read and write scores both of 110-ish on my 750GB 7200rpm HDD.

You could ask OWC if there is some setting I am missing when I run QuickBench, but otherwise I am not sure how they explain how the results between Black Magic and QuickBench are statistically the same on my drive.

I don't know. I am the furthest thing from an expert when it comes to SSD drives. So maybe I am missing something.
Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Thanks for the feedback.
__________________
iPhone 5S White/Silver 64GB AT&T
iPad Air White/Silver 16GB AT&T
MBA 11" / 27" ACD / ATV3
jamesryanbell is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2011, 12:29 AM   #29
SDColorado
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesryanbell View Post
Pretty much my thoughts exactly. Thanks for the feedback.
Besides, doesn't this quote from What's New in Version 2.1, contradict their statement in Email 1:

"Some SSD's use hidden compression when writing data to make their benchmarked speeds appear faster. Disk Speed Test will now measure the true speed of these SSD's so you know if they are suitable for high quality uncompressed video capture."

It sounds to me as though Black Magic is using the uncompressed test that OWC recommends.

Edit: Also, clearly *not* for HD only as OWC states in email 2.
__________________
'10 6-Core Mac Pro 3.33GHz '12 17" MBP 2.5GHz '12 15" MBP 2.6 GHz '14 13" MBP 2.8 GHz iPad3 64GB WiFi +LTE iPhone 5 64GB
SDColorado is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2011, 11:00 AM   #30
InSaNeBoY
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2005
84.4/139.5 are the highest numbers I've seen on my OWC drive using the black magic speed test...

(not an air though, 2008 mac pro, stumbled on this thread via google search)
InSaNeBoY is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2011, 01:09 PM   #31
jamesryanbell
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
jamesryanbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDColorado View Post
Besides, doesn't this quote from What's New in Version 2.1, contradict their statement in Email 1:

"Some SSD's use hidden compression when writing data to make their benchmarked speeds appear faster. Disk Speed Test will now measure the true speed of these SSD's so you know if they are suitable for high quality uncompressed video capture."

It sounds to me as though Black Magic is using the uncompressed test that OWC recommends.

Edit: Also, clearly *not* for HD only as OWC states in email 2.
You're right on.
__________________
iPhone 5S White/Silver 64GB AT&T
iPad Air White/Silver 16GB AT&T
MBA 11" / 27" ACD / ATV3
jamesryanbell is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2011, 02:16 PM   #32
iRCL
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
OP sorry to hear that

Is your SSD quite full? Or has it been at some point in time? Due to the whole TRIM mess and so on, what you can try to do is move all your data to an external HDD, completely format your SSD and then put all of your data back. Think of it like a defrag. This will likely improve your speeds.

However all the stuff OWC said is a bunch of crap. I think that company is pure overpriced garbage TBH and yes I would be upset if I were you. There's always ebay..
iRCL is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2011, 02:55 PM   #33
rwh202
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: UK
People seem to be getting confused by the compression here.

The OWC is a SandForce drive - this does compression to achieve the rated speeds.

For example, the drive may only be able to physically write 100MB/s to the NAND, but if it can achieve 3:1 compression, then it appears as a 300MB/s write.

However, not all data can be compressed. If you give it progressively more compressed data to start with, it can't be compressed as much so you will hit the 100MB/s (or whatever) limit sooner.

The updated BlackMagic seems to write heavily compressed data to stop these drives 'cheating' so gives a worst case performance to cater for demanding video capture.

My Sandforce powered 275/285MB/s drive in a MBP also only manages 80/160 on the BlackMagic test so I don't think there is anything wrong. It's still blinding fast in normal use.
rwh202 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2011, 11:22 AM   #34
jamesryanbell
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
jamesryanbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by iRCL View Post
OP sorry to hear that

Is your SSD quite full? Or has it been at some point in time? Due to the whole TRIM mess and so on, what you can try to do is move all your data to an external HDD, completely format your SSD and then put all of your data back. Think of it like a defrag. This will likely improve your speeds.

However all the stuff OWC said is a bunch of crap. I think that company is pure overpriced garbage TBH and yes I would be upset if I were you. There's always ebay..
No, I have 100GB of free space. I may try that with the external drive. Thanks!
__________________
iPhone 5S White/Silver 64GB AT&T
iPad Air White/Silver 16GB AT&T
MBA 11" / 27" ACD / ATV3
jamesryanbell is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2011, 04:44 PM   #35
ZipZap
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwh202 View Post
People seem to be getting confused by the compression here.

The OWC is a SandForce drive - this does compression to achieve the rated speeds.

For example, the drive may only be able to physically write 100MB/s to the NAND, but if it can achieve 3:1 compression, then it appears as a 300MB/s write.

However, not all data can be compressed. If you give it progressively more compressed data to start with, it can't be compressed as much so you will hit the 100MB/s (or whatever) limit sooner.

The updated BlackMagic seems to write heavily compressed data to stop these drives 'cheating' so gives a worst case performance to cater for demanding video capture.

My Sandforce powered 275/285MB/s drive in a MBP also only manages 80/160 on the BlackMagic test so I don't think there is anything wrong. It's still blinding fast in normal use.
Interesting...thanks for the info.

Would be nice if we could get the Blackmagic folks to comment on this. Seems OWC's do not show the expected rates.

Has anyone contacted OWC for comment?
ZipZap is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2011, 04:09 AM   #36
rwh202
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZipZap View Post
Would be nice if we could get the Blackmagic folks to comment on this. Seems OWC's do not show the expected rates.
The BlackMagic help file also explains their process in the final section -"Important note about Solid State Disk (SSD) speeds"

Also, just as an experiment, I changed the BlackMagic test directory to somewhere more accessible, ran the test, copied the test file to the desktop and right clicked and chose "compress ...."
The 541MB file was 'compressed' to 542MB! This shows that the data that is being written by BlackMagic really is is highly compressed, i.e. incompressible any further by a SandForce drive.
rwh202 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2011, 04:51 PM   #37
jon08
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Disk Speed Test v. 2.1

Write: cca. 180-240 MB/s
Read: cca. 460-490 MB/s

OWC Mercury Extreme PRO 6G 120GB.

So is this good?
__________________
 15.4" MacBook Pro (late 2011), 2.2 Ghz Intel Core i7, Crucial 8GB RAM, Crucial M500 480GB SSD, AMD Radeon 6750M 
 iPad Air 32 GB 

 iPhone 6 64 GB 
jon08 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2011, 08:25 PM   #38
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by jon08 View Post
Disk Speed Test v. 2.1

Write: cca. 180-240 MB/s
Read: cca. 460-490 MB/s

OWC Mercury Extreme PRO 6G 120GB.

So is this good?
Yes, the read speeds are about twice as fast as the native drives. The main difference is that the SSD you are using supports the faster version of SATA.
KPOM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2011, 09:41 AM   #39
ZipZap
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
With an MBA and an OWC Drive....I dont get a performance reading anywhere close to expected.

I have the original 3g SSD 180GB
ZipZap is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2011, 10:48 AM   #40
jamesryanbell
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
jamesryanbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZipZap View Post
With an MBA and an OWC Drive....I dont get a performance reading anywhere close to expected.

I have the original 3g SSD 180GB
I guess it's the compressed data issue every time.
__________________
iPhone 5S White/Silver 64GB AT&T
iPad Air White/Silver 16GB AT&T
MBA 11" / 27" ACD / ATV3
jamesryanbell is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28, 2011, 07:50 PM   #41
hh83917
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
The OWC sandforce drives use compression technology.
The OWC email did said this new compression technology will not show it's full potential under any benchmark other than Quickbench, because it's the only one that can include this compression technology in the benchmark.

As far as I can tell from this thread, no one posted any results of OWC drives using Quickbench. The only Quickbench result I see here is the Samsung drive, which is not we are concerning about.

Unless someone can post some Quickbench result from the OWC drive vs the Samsung drive, there is no proof that the OWC drive is slower.

BTW, The 6G OWC drive should not be considered because it's simply a faster SATA interface and that's in a different category.

Edit: Found a benchmark regarding this on Barefeats: http://www.barefeats.com/mba11_03.html
They said the OWC drive is faster after testing with Quickbench.

Last edited by hh83917; Dec 29, 2011 at 03:12 AM.
hh83917 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2011, 03:50 AM   #42
jon08
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
^^ I've performed QuickBench tests on my OWC Mercury Extreme Pro (120GB) before and got the following results on:

Write: 440-470 MB/s
Read: 500-510 MB/s
__________________
 15.4" MacBook Pro (late 2011), 2.2 Ghz Intel Core i7, Crucial 8GB RAM, Crucial M500 480GB SSD, AMD Radeon 6750M 
 iPad Air 32 GB 

 iPhone 6 64 GB 
jon08 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2011, 12:34 PM   #43
bdodds1985
macrumors 6502a
 
bdodds1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tartarus
I use this app but recenlty its telling me that my macintosh hd is read only. which is wrong. it works perfect for my optical bay hd. also ive noticed any time i copy or add something to the normal hd it asks me for a password. finder says "you can only read"... any idea on how to fix this so i can run the speed test?
__________________

| Mac Mini | MBP |
bdodds1985 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2011, 04:24 PM   #44
hh83917
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by jon08 View Post
^^ I've performed QuickBench tests on my OWC Mercury Extreme Pro (120GB) before and got the following results on:

Write: 440-470 MB/s
Read: 500-510 MB/s
Yes, but I thought your test is on the "Mercury Extreme Pro 6G" which is a much faster SATA interface, hence the 6G.

We are talking about just normal SATA 3G here.
hh83917 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2011, 04:25 PM   #45
jon08
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Yeah, it's the 6G one...
__________________
 15.4" MacBook Pro (late 2011), 2.2 Ghz Intel Core i7, Crucial 8GB RAM, Crucial M500 480GB SSD, AMD Radeon 6750M 
 iPad Air 32 GB 

 iPhone 6 64 GB 
jon08 is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 27, 2012, 08:29 PM   #46
portishead
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: los angeles
I have a 120GB Electra in my iMac, and I am only getting 100MB/s read, and about 180MB/s write using Blackmagic Disk Speed Test.

In an older version I was getting close to 500MB/s both ways. I know it's measuring Incompressible rates now, but still, those numbers look pretty slow. I wouldn't buy OWC.
portishead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2012, 06:32 PM   #47
jamesryanbell
Thread Starter
macrumors 68020
 
jamesryanbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Thanks for all of the input. Sorry that I'm responding late.
__________________
iPhone 5S White/Silver 64GB AT&T
iPad Air White/Silver 16GB AT&T
MBA 11" / 27" ACD / ATV3
jamesryanbell is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2012, 06:57 PM   #48
IngerMan
macrumors 6502a
 
IngerMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Buffalo, NY.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesryanbell View Post
Thanks for all of the input. Sorry that I'm responding late.
Is the slower test results issue resolved? Did you hear back from OWC with satisfaction?

I am curious because I consider them an option for the future. But service and performance is a big factor.
__________________
MBP 15" Quad | iPad 4G | iMac 20" C2D | iPhone 4S | TV2
IngerMan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2012, 06:47 PM   #49
MacShopper
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Wow, I thought mine was fast, but it's slower than everyone else's above.

But mine is BIGGER!

512 GB SSD
Model: Apple SSD TS512C
Mfgr: Toshiba


MacShopper is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2012, 08:22 PM   #50
katmeef
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
I had an agility 3 in my last mbp and found after a year or so things slowed down. I cloned it to an external, 'secure erased' it using the manufacturer supplied Linux boot disc (only took a few seconds to complete) and cloned it back, things seemed much faster afterwards.

Also I found Aja system test to give higher results on read/write scores as opposed to black magic, although since Lion I noticed I need to launch it with sudo for it to be able to create the test file at the root of the drive.
katmeef is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Air

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Black Magic Disk Speed Test macuser1232 MacBook Pro 22 Nov 21, 2014 10:09 PM
Black Magic Disk Test Thunderbolt Adapter comparisons bonedaddio iMac 45 Nov 11, 2014 12:38 AM
rMBP Black Magic Disk Speed Test Mr Dobey MacBook Pro 11 Jun 18, 2014 11:57 AM
Black magic speed test on nMP raw911 Mac Pro 20 Jan 31, 2014 11:16 AM
Disk speed test (free, not black magic)? CavemanMike Mac Applications and Mac App Store 4 Jan 26, 2014 08:08 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:12 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC