Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
SSD Too slow?
- Thread starter Inakto
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Does blackmagic write in hard to compress-data or easy to compress-data? Ive seen 2 windowssoftwares used different types and people were wondering why some had so high when they had so little when in fact the test software was to blame.
OK so this is Xbench... Honestly I don't know what these numbers mean Lol
Attachments
I would try ASSSD or HDtach they are more reliable.
Even for compressed data it seems to low. Afaik a 240GB sf 2200 can handle much more.
Is it by any chance running on Sata 2.
According to Anandtech with Sata 2 your numbers aren't that far of but with Sata 3 it should be somewhere around 340 MB/s sequential.
Even for compressed data it seems to low. Afaik a 240GB sf 2200 can handle much more.
Is it by any chance running on Sata 2.
According to Anandtech with Sata 2 your numbers aren't that far of but with Sata 3 it should be somewhere around 340 MB/s sequential.
What does data compression have to do with disk I/O tests?Does blackmagic write in hard to compress-data or easy to compress-data? Ive seen 2 windowssoftwares used different types and people were wondering why some had so high when they had so little when in fact the test software was to blame.
Have you seen any SSD comparison videos for MacBook pros? I swear the last time I saw one of those it had the same read/ write data that you provided us in the statistics. It might be just me, so I would also suggest searching your problem on google, see if there are other people in the same boat as you, with the same problem as you.
Out of curiosity: what were the advertised read/write speeds of your SSD according the where you purchased it from.
Im no expert in any way but I read on another forum that 2 different softwares used 2 different types of data, one used easily compressed data and one used more difficult data, and this resulted in different write speeds. Also, if you read reviews on SSD's its often mentioned that some of them performs a bit worse with hard-to-compress-data while others performs better with it, so Im sure its not irrelevant.
Blackmagic uses only uncompressible data and always reads low. It does say that in their support info
IMHO folks around here get too hung up in #'s. It works, or it doesn't. Link speed right? Check. Disc Permissions correct? Check, machine run with no errors? Check, Go play
IMHO folks around here get too hung up in #'s. It works, or it doesn't. Link speed right? Check. Disc Permissions correct? Check, machine run with no errors? Check, Go play
Blackmagic uses only uncompressible data and always reads low. It does say that in their support info
IMHO folks around here get too hung up in #'s. It works, or it doesn't. Link speed right? Check. Disc Permissions correct? Check, machine run with no errors? Check, Go play
I agree, from what Ive understood the normal everyday user benefits more from access times than actual write speeds, I mean thats the impression Ive got from reading about SSD's.
Blackmagic uses only uncompressible data and always reads low. It does say that in their support info
IMHO folks around here get too hung up in #'s. It works, or it doesn't. Link speed right? Check. Disc Permissions correct? Check, machine run with no errors? Check, Go play
Correct. I don't understand the paranoia that I see around these forums.
It's not that. The drive is working quite well, however it did cost $230 and I would like to see that it is set up correctly, and giving me numbers close to what is promised.
Here is a AS SSD benchmark as recommended.
