Are these numbers good, bad or so-so

[elazarus]

I just did a reading on Crystal disk......how do these numbers rate?



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : Crystal Dew World
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 437.697 MB/s
Sequential Write : 248.950 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 238.352 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 15.661 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 15.466 MB/s [ 3776.0 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 11.032 MB/s [ 2693.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 28.783 MB/s [ 7027.0 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 7.124 MB/s [ 1739.2 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 55.3% (51.5/93.2 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2012/07/29 13:58:08
OS : Windows 7 Home Premium Edition SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)


Thank you

Elliot

[tilleroftheearth]

Rate to what?

Details, please!!!

[elazarus]

The numbers represent the results from the test for a new laptop with a SSD.

I did not mentioned the brand or model of the SSD to sway any thinking either way.

The question I asked but stated differently for you:

How do these results measure up based upon usual and customary SSD read/write results?

I see diminishing numbers as I go down the chart which seems to be normal but are the numbers for reading and writing good or bad.

thank you

[Mr.Mischief]

The numbers represent the results from the test for a new laptop with a SSD.

I did not mentioned the brand or model of the SSD to sway any thinking either way.

The question I asked but stated differently for you:

How do these results measure up based upon usual and customary SSD read/write results?

I see diminishing numbers as I go down the chart which seems to be normal but are the numbers for reading and writing good or bad.

thank you

There is no "usual" speed for an SSD. Different models perform differently. If you tell us the model, we can tell you if it's performing as it should.

[tilleroftheearth]

The numbers are bad for a current gen SSD in a current gen (Intel IB based) system.

Looks a lot like the Samsung notebooks with sub-par SSD's installed.

Now can we have the details?

The numbers represent the results from the test for a new laptop with a SSD.

I did not mentioned the brand or model of the SSD to sway any thinking either way.

The question I asked but stated differently for you:

How do these results measure up based upon usual and customary SSD read/write results?

I see diminishing numbers as I go down the chart which seems to be normal but are the numbers for reading and writing good or bad.

thank you

[elazarus]

Thank you.....

My new computer is a Samsung NP900X3c-A01 with a SanDisk U-100 SSD.

The computer is great (Screen, keyboard, Display and Trackpad) but I do have some doubt on the Battery life, Samsung programs for updating etc, and the partions that wind up giving you 48gb of space from the get go.

The SSD is not bad but I have yet to run Excel and multiple programs that do photo processing.......so far, the 4gb of Ram don't seem to be a problem.

Of course for $1300 I would expect a faster SSD (up till now I don't see it as too bad...considering that I have seen posts that people were going to commit suicide over getting this drive)

Right now I am debating keeping this Series 9 or sending it back for a more "conventional" notebook with a SSD.......and I am not ruling out a Macbook Air although I am so used to Windows.


Elliot

[baiii]

Some of the speed is really low compare to current gen 2.5" SSD, but would you notice a difference when compare to said SSD? You will only know if you compare them in real life yourself.

[tilleroftheearth]

Yeah, that's the machine I was thinking of...

See:
Samsung Series 9 15" NP900X4C Ivy Bridge Ultrabook Overview and SSD Performance Analysis - The SSD Review


There would be a very real and noticeable improvement if you upgraded the SSD from the U100 - almost 7.5x faster (or more, depending on the SSD...) - but it is not the reason you don't want to keep this system/SSD - it is because it is very, very bad at doing any read/write tasks concurrently.

Also, if you value performance at all: please, rule out the MBA - it is simply not in the same class by any stretch of the imagination (not even with the magical OS/x).

[Peon]

Also, if you value performance at all: please, rule out the MBA - it is simply not in the same class by any stretch of the imagination (not even with the magical OS/x).

Doesn't the refreshed MBA have hardware that's basically identical to the NP900X3c-A01? From what I can tell, the 13" MBA's CPU is even slightly faster

[elazarus]

I have a desktop with an OCZ SSD 1.5 years old that is like lightening. I cannot tell yet if this San Disk in the Samsung is fast or slow because I have not tried to edit a picture or crunch some numbers.

I love the MBA but it is a hassle to think of adding Windows and Quickbooks (I need this for business)........

I am replacing a 4 year old Thinkpad that is too slow. The primary reason for this new Ultrabook is for a "Stand-by" machine in case my desktop ever dumped and then I have a laptop ready to go. The second reason is that for travel, 6 weeks a year for business, I wanted something lighter than the Slow Thinkpad that I have....and the ipad does not do it for me for travel.

I do not have to have and Ultrabook and could even go for a light weight 15" as the back up/travel maching as long as it has an SSD....Any Thoughts?

Thank you

Elliot