Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

gugucom

macrumors 68020
Original poster
I noticed that my Supertalent MEs were experiencing massive speed loss in tests when file size fell under 32k and set my strip size accordingly. If I remember right I went to 64k.

When I cloned my OS X drive I got something like 30 MB/s average and initally it was down at 10. Later when I was copying Gigabyte files (Winclone images) it got up to 110 MB/s peak value.

I have no simmillar info for my new Intels 2nd gen. So provisionally I'll be using a simillar value.

I also noticed that Windows disk management program uses 4128k as a standard which appears massive and probably usefull for HDDs.

Could somebody with more in depth knowledge advise a rational choice for OS x and Windows for different SSDs?
 
I noticed that my Supertalent MEs were experiencing massive speed loss in tests when file size fell under 32k and set my strip size accordingly. If I remember right I went to 64k.

When I cloned my OS X drive I got something like 30 MB/s average and initally it was down at 10. Later when I was copying Gigabyte files (Winclone images) it got up to 110 MB/s peak value.

I have no simmillar info for my new Intels 2nd gen. So provisionally I'll be using a simillar value.

I also noticed that Windows disk management program uses 4128k as a standard which appears massive and probably usefull for HDDs.

Could somebody with more in depth knowledge advise a rational choice for OS x and Windows for different SSDs?
Internally, SSD's are using 4KB pages, but to the system blocks are 512KB, or 128 pages per block.

128 pages * 4KB = 512KB for the stripe yeilds the best results.

I've also seen 512 used in an article or two.
 
I guess thats true then for Windows as well. OS X will also have much smaller file sizes.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.