Page 1 of 1
MLC v SLC
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:09 am
by Brad
I recently received a Samsung MLC drive for the X300 and used HD Tune to compare the two.
Here is what I found.
HD Tune: SAMSUNG MCCOE64G8MPP Benchmark SLC Windows xP sP3 32 bit
Transfer Rate Minimum : 49.4 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 72.9 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 56.9 MB/sec
Access Time : 0.6 ms
Burst Rate : 50.3 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 16.0%
HD Tune: SAMSUNG MMCRE64G8MXP Benchmark MLC Vista Business 32 bit
Transfer Rate Minimum : 66.0 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 97.5 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 69.3 MB/sec
Access Time : 0.2 ms
Burst Rate : 47.9 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 22.0%
Any thoughts?
Brad
Re: MLC v SLC
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:34 am
by visionviper
Brad wrote:Any thoughts?
That SLC drive is ~8 months older than that MLC drive - which also happens to be a quite recently released drive.
Re: MLC v SLC
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:41 pm
by LenovoGringo
Isn't Vista more SSD 'compatible?' I know Win 7 has settings to automatically take advantage of SSD tech.
Re: MLC v SLC
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:21 pm
by AvalonXIII
Brad wrote:I recently received a Samsung MLC drive for the X300 and used HD Tune to compare the two.
Here is what I found.
HD Tune: SAMSUNG MCCOE64G8MPP Benchmark SLC Windows xP sP3 32 bit
Transfer Rate Minimum : 49.4 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 72.9 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 56.9 MB/sec
Access Time : 0.6 ms
Burst Rate : 50.3 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 16.0%
HD Tune: SAMSUNG MMCRE64G8MXP Benchmark MLC Vista Business 32 bit
Transfer Rate Minimum : 66.0 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 97.5 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 69.3 MB/sec
Access Time : 0.2 ms
Burst Rate : 47.9 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 22.0%
Any thoughts?
Brad
Your benchmark is too low for both the MLC and the SLC drive. I'm assuming you're benchmarking read speed, which should be around 90MB/sec to 100MB/sec average.
Re: MLC v SLC
Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:39 pm
by Brad
Thanks for all your replies.
The results seem very low to me also.
This is an X300. Are there other settings that I am missing?
Brad
Re: MLC v SLC
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:58 am
by AvalonXIII
Brad wrote:Thanks for all your replies.
The results seem very low to me also.
This is an X300. Are there other settings that I am missing?
Brad
Try using CrystalDiskMark and post the result again. There shouldn't be any reason why the result is that low, unless you run other software while benchmarking.