Low SSD Performance Adata SU650
I recently got a new computer and am slightly concerned by the benchmark scores I am getting with a CrystalDiskMark and AS SSD. I have an Adata SU650 240 GB SSD.
Here are the scores I get in AS SSD:
- Seq 510 MB/s 175.11 MB/s
- 4K 12.86 MB/s 66.32 MB/s
- 4K-64Thrd 140.20 MB/s 254.08 MB/s
- Acc.time 0.080 ms 0.156ms
Here are the scores I get in Crystal:
- Seq Q32T1 546.7 188.8
- 4 KiB Q8T8 110.9 270.5
- 4 KiB Q32T1 110.4 191.3
- 3 KiB Q1T1 15.22 77.15
I have reinstalled Windows 10 and still get the same sort of scores. Can someone tell me if this is normal for this drive or is there something else that could be causing these poor speeds?
It's the 4K speeds that are concerning me more than anything.
Should they not be a lot higher?
Looking at other peoples' results on the Internet,
they are much faster for a similar type of drive.
System Specs
- Intel I7-8700k
- 16 GB DDR4 2666
- Gigabyte B360M-D3P Motherboard
- Adata SU650 SSD
- Seagate Barracuda 2 TB HD
ssd benchmarking
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
add a comment |
I recently got a new computer and am slightly concerned by the benchmark scores I am getting with a CrystalDiskMark and AS SSD. I have an Adata SU650 240 GB SSD.
Here are the scores I get in AS SSD:
- Seq 510 MB/s 175.11 MB/s
- 4K 12.86 MB/s 66.32 MB/s
- 4K-64Thrd 140.20 MB/s 254.08 MB/s
- Acc.time 0.080 ms 0.156ms
Here are the scores I get in Crystal:
- Seq Q32T1 546.7 188.8
- 4 KiB Q8T8 110.9 270.5
- 4 KiB Q32T1 110.4 191.3
- 3 KiB Q1T1 15.22 77.15
I have reinstalled Windows 10 and still get the same sort of scores. Can someone tell me if this is normal for this drive or is there something else that could be causing these poor speeds?
It's the 4K speeds that are concerning me more than anything.
Should they not be a lot higher?
Looking at other peoples' results on the Internet,
they are much faster for a similar type of drive.
System Specs
- Intel I7-8700k
- 16 GB DDR4 2666
- Gigabyte B360M-D3P Motherboard
- Adata SU650 SSD
- Seagate Barracuda 2 TB HD
ssd benchmarking
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
How is that "low performance"? How those results differ from the manufacturer's specifications?
– GabrielaGarcia
Oct 8 '18 at 20:55
@GabrielaGarcia I think OP is referring to the write speeds. According to ADATA's official spec sheet, write speeds in CDM and AS should be "up to 450" and "up to 430", respectively. However, OP's own tests show 188 and 175 respectively. OP's read speeds seem much more in line with the stated specs.
– Stanley Yu
Oct 8 '18 at 21:21
It's the 4k speeds that are concerning me more than anything. Should they not be a lot higher, as looking at other peoples results on the internet, they are much faster for a similar type of drive?
– ClintD
Oct 8 '18 at 21:26
add a comment |
I recently got a new computer and am slightly concerned by the benchmark scores I am getting with a CrystalDiskMark and AS SSD. I have an Adata SU650 240 GB SSD.
Here are the scores I get in AS SSD:
- Seq 510 MB/s 175.11 MB/s
- 4K 12.86 MB/s 66.32 MB/s
- 4K-64Thrd 140.20 MB/s 254.08 MB/s
- Acc.time 0.080 ms 0.156ms
Here are the scores I get in Crystal:
- Seq Q32T1 546.7 188.8
- 4 KiB Q8T8 110.9 270.5
- 4 KiB Q32T1 110.4 191.3
- 3 KiB Q1T1 15.22 77.15
I have reinstalled Windows 10 and still get the same sort of scores. Can someone tell me if this is normal for this drive or is there something else that could be causing these poor speeds?
It's the 4K speeds that are concerning me more than anything.
Should they not be a lot higher?
Looking at other peoples' results on the Internet,
they are much faster for a similar type of drive.
System Specs
- Intel I7-8700k
- 16 GB DDR4 2666
- Gigabyte B360M-D3P Motherboard
- Adata SU650 SSD
- Seagate Barracuda 2 TB HD
ssd benchmarking
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
I recently got a new computer and am slightly concerned by the benchmark scores I am getting with a CrystalDiskMark and AS SSD. I have an Adata SU650 240 GB SSD.
Here are the scores I get in AS SSD:
- Seq 510 MB/s 175.11 MB/s
- 4K 12.86 MB/s 66.32 MB/s
- 4K-64Thrd 140.20 MB/s 254.08 MB/s
- Acc.time 0.080 ms 0.156ms
Here are the scores I get in Crystal:
- Seq Q32T1 546.7 188.8
- 4 KiB Q8T8 110.9 270.5
- 4 KiB Q32T1 110.4 191.3
- 3 KiB Q1T1 15.22 77.15
I have reinstalled Windows 10 and still get the same sort of scores. Can someone tell me if this is normal for this drive or is there something else that could be causing these poor speeds?
It's the 4K speeds that are concerning me more than anything.
Should they not be a lot higher?
Looking at other peoples' results on the Internet,
they are much faster for a similar type of drive.
System Specs
- Intel I7-8700k
- 16 GB DDR4 2666
- Gigabyte B360M-D3P Motherboard
- Adata SU650 SSD
- Seagate Barracuda 2 TB HD
ssd benchmarking
ssd benchmarking
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
edited Jan 5 at 2:57
Scott
15.7k113890
15.7k113890
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
asked Oct 8 '18 at 20:50
ClintDClintD
1
1
How is that "low performance"? How those results differ from the manufacturer's specifications?
– GabrielaGarcia
Oct 8 '18 at 20:55
@GabrielaGarcia I think OP is referring to the write speeds. According to ADATA's official spec sheet, write speeds in CDM and AS should be "up to 450" and "up to 430", respectively. However, OP's own tests show 188 and 175 respectively. OP's read speeds seem much more in line with the stated specs.
– Stanley Yu
Oct 8 '18 at 21:21
It's the 4k speeds that are concerning me more than anything. Should they not be a lot higher, as looking at other peoples results on the internet, they are much faster for a similar type of drive?
– ClintD
Oct 8 '18 at 21:26
add a comment |
How is that "low performance"? How those results differ from the manufacturer's specifications?
– GabrielaGarcia
Oct 8 '18 at 20:55
@GabrielaGarcia I think OP is referring to the write speeds. According to ADATA's official spec sheet, write speeds in CDM and AS should be "up to 450" and "up to 430", respectively. However, OP's own tests show 188 and 175 respectively. OP's read speeds seem much more in line with the stated specs.
– Stanley Yu
Oct 8 '18 at 21:21
It's the 4k speeds that are concerning me more than anything. Should they not be a lot higher, as looking at other peoples results on the internet, they are much faster for a similar type of drive?
– ClintD
Oct 8 '18 at 21:26
How is that "low performance"? How those results differ from the manufacturer's specifications?
– GabrielaGarcia
Oct 8 '18 at 20:55
How is that "low performance"? How those results differ from the manufacturer's specifications?
– GabrielaGarcia
Oct 8 '18 at 20:55
@GabrielaGarcia I think OP is referring to the write speeds. According to ADATA's official spec sheet, write speeds in CDM and AS should be "up to 450" and "up to 430", respectively. However, OP's own tests show 188 and 175 respectively. OP's read speeds seem much more in line with the stated specs.
– Stanley Yu
Oct 8 '18 at 21:21
@GabrielaGarcia I think OP is referring to the write speeds. According to ADATA's official spec sheet, write speeds in CDM and AS should be "up to 450" and "up to 430", respectively. However, OP's own tests show 188 and 175 respectively. OP's read speeds seem much more in line with the stated specs.
– Stanley Yu
Oct 8 '18 at 21:21
It's the 4k speeds that are concerning me more than anything. Should they not be a lot higher, as looking at other peoples results on the internet, they are much faster for a similar type of drive?
– ClintD
Oct 8 '18 at 21:26
It's the 4k speeds that are concerning me more than anything. Should they not be a lot higher, as looking at other peoples results on the internet, they are much faster for a similar type of drive?
– ClintD
Oct 8 '18 at 21:26
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Actually you're getting what you're paying for. I'm not claiming it's a bad drive but it's very cheap QLC, reinstall won't help. Basically what you're experiencing is that the drive is using SLC cache when it's quite empty, and that's "up to 430" actually it seems even more. Now it is probably not empty, so you can count on sustained mixed r/w throughput at levels of 30-70 MB/s.
I'm doing some tests of this drive and was looking for materials. Peak throughput is great and totally matches manufacturer's data. So in short i'm not sure about failure rates but that's great driver for desktop OS. Not so great for copying a lot of large files ;)
Sustained throughput
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
1
We prefer that you not post images that consist primarily of text. That goes double when the text is not in English. If you believe that the report you posted supports your answer, please translate the words into English and type them in.
– Scott
Jan 5 at 2:40
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1364974%2flow-ssd-performance-adata-su650%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Actually you're getting what you're paying for. I'm not claiming it's a bad drive but it's very cheap QLC, reinstall won't help. Basically what you're experiencing is that the drive is using SLC cache when it's quite empty, and that's "up to 430" actually it seems even more. Now it is probably not empty, so you can count on sustained mixed r/w throughput at levels of 30-70 MB/s.
I'm doing some tests of this drive and was looking for materials. Peak throughput is great and totally matches manufacturer's data. So in short i'm not sure about failure rates but that's great driver for desktop OS. Not so great for copying a lot of large files ;)
Sustained throughput
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
1
We prefer that you not post images that consist primarily of text. That goes double when the text is not in English. If you believe that the report you posted supports your answer, please translate the words into English and type them in.
– Scott
Jan 5 at 2:40
add a comment |
Actually you're getting what you're paying for. I'm not claiming it's a bad drive but it's very cheap QLC, reinstall won't help. Basically what you're experiencing is that the drive is using SLC cache when it's quite empty, and that's "up to 430" actually it seems even more. Now it is probably not empty, so you can count on sustained mixed r/w throughput at levels of 30-70 MB/s.
I'm doing some tests of this drive and was looking for materials. Peak throughput is great and totally matches manufacturer's data. So in short i'm not sure about failure rates but that's great driver for desktop OS. Not so great for copying a lot of large files ;)
Sustained throughput
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
1
We prefer that you not post images that consist primarily of text. That goes double when the text is not in English. If you believe that the report you posted supports your answer, please translate the words into English and type them in.
– Scott
Jan 5 at 2:40
add a comment |
Actually you're getting what you're paying for. I'm not claiming it's a bad drive but it's very cheap QLC, reinstall won't help. Basically what you're experiencing is that the drive is using SLC cache when it's quite empty, and that's "up to 430" actually it seems even more. Now it is probably not empty, so you can count on sustained mixed r/w throughput at levels of 30-70 MB/s.
I'm doing some tests of this drive and was looking for materials. Peak throughput is great and totally matches manufacturer's data. So in short i'm not sure about failure rates but that's great driver for desktop OS. Not so great for copying a lot of large files ;)
Sustained throughput
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
Actually you're getting what you're paying for. I'm not claiming it's a bad drive but it's very cheap QLC, reinstall won't help. Basically what you're experiencing is that the drive is using SLC cache when it's quite empty, and that's "up to 430" actually it seems even more. Now it is probably not empty, so you can count on sustained mixed r/w throughput at levels of 30-70 MB/s.
I'm doing some tests of this drive and was looking for materials. Peak throughput is great and totally matches manufacturer's data. So in short i'm not sure about failure rates but that's great driver for desktop OS. Not so great for copying a lot of large files ;)
Sustained throughput
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
answered Jan 5 at 2:27
SlawekSlawek
1111
1111
1
We prefer that you not post images that consist primarily of text. That goes double when the text is not in English. If you believe that the report you posted supports your answer, please translate the words into English and type them in.
– Scott
Jan 5 at 2:40
add a comment |
1
We prefer that you not post images that consist primarily of text. That goes double when the text is not in English. If you believe that the report you posted supports your answer, please translate the words into English and type them in.
– Scott
Jan 5 at 2:40
1
1
We prefer that you not post images that consist primarily of text. That goes double when the text is not in English. If you believe that the report you posted supports your answer, please translate the words into English and type them in.
– Scott
Jan 5 at 2:40
We prefer that you not post images that consist primarily of text. That goes double when the text is not in English. If you believe that the report you posted supports your answer, please translate the words into English and type them in.
– Scott
Jan 5 at 2:40
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1364974%2flow-ssd-performance-adata-su650%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
How is that "low performance"? How those results differ from the manufacturer's specifications?
– GabrielaGarcia
Oct 8 '18 at 20:55
@GabrielaGarcia I think OP is referring to the write speeds. According to ADATA's official spec sheet, write speeds in CDM and AS should be "up to 450" and "up to 430", respectively. However, OP's own tests show 188 and 175 respectively. OP's read speeds seem much more in line with the stated specs.
– Stanley Yu
Oct 8 '18 at 21:21
It's the 4k speeds that are concerning me more than anything. Should they not be a lot higher, as looking at other peoples results on the internet, they are much faster for a similar type of drive?
– ClintD
Oct 8 '18 at 21:26