Recent content by nsa666

N
AS SSD Benchmark

You must enable AHCI to get full performance.
- nsa666
- Post #64
- Oct 27, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Update: 1.2.3577.40358 - Changed the sorting of drives in the list 1.2.3556.18595 - Minor changes.
- nsa666
- Post #61
- Oct 18, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

something like SSD1 is very unusual. I took 4k tests because of Size of NTFS-cluster. See http://ixbtlabs.com/articles/hddide2k1feb/iometer.html Combined read/write test could be interesting on particular scenarios but i will not include too much tests in the main-test. It could be added...
- nsa666
- Post #55
- Aug 6, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Update: 1.2.3487.20916 * IOPS-View
- nsa666
- Post #46
- Jul 19, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Standart windows AHCI-drivers should acutaly be enough.
- nsa666
- Post #35
- Jul 7, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Not because what it shows, but because of the results. the 64-threads tests is not faster than 1-thread tests->AHCI/NCQ is not working correctly.
- nsa666
- Post #33
- Jun 28, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Strange that you getting different values. Set CDM to 1GB testsize and if it doesnt change try my benchmark again. 25MB/s seq. write is surely wrong.
- nsa666
- Post #30
- Jun 28, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

@n7: you should switch to AHCI mode.
- nsa666
- Post #28
- Jun 28, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

it is clearly too slow for an intel ssd.. you should get something like this: http://www.abload.de/img/asbench4lcju.png (older version of as ssd bench)
- nsa666
- Post #26
- Jun 28, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

it is surely a lot faster than a hdd.. Update: 1.1.3466.29641 * Update checker * New score system + Small design changes
- nsa666
- Post #22
- Jun 28, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Than it is problem with the ramdrive-driver that not fully emulates a disk drive. But this is nothing to be concerned about, because its only used by some low level tools(and benchmarks), so its not practicaly relevant.
- nsa666
- Post #17
- Jun 25, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Results are limited by cpu. 4k-64thread test seems acutaly ok(10GB/s is litle too fast, enough free space on the ramdrive?) its only some graphical bug. I will fix it.Since you have multicore cpu the 64thread test can be faster than sequentual single thread tests. You will not get stable results...
- nsa666
- Post #15
- Jun 24, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

@taltamier: Took that on wishlist.
- nsa666
- Post #13
- Jun 24, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

Update: 1.0.3462.36297 - Filename bugfix at screenshot-function of copy-benchmark
- nsa666
- Post #11
- Jun 24, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage
N
AS SSD Benchmark

That stripsize test is interesting. Thank you. That textbox next to partiiton selection box is for your notes, so you dont need to edit the screenshot afterwards. ;)
- nsa666
- Post #8
- Jun 21, 2009
- Forum: Memory and Storage

RESOURCES

Top Bottom