Jump to content
Corsair Community

Force 3 120GB Poor performance issue


Tirppa

Recommended Posts

Hi!

 

Just installed my system with the new Force 3 120GB SSD and the results are somewhat poor. I get pretty much same results as I would be running a SATA II SSD.

 

I have Asus P8P67 Pro motherboard and I've installed the SSD to the intel SATA III interface (the gray one according to the manual). I have included a screenshot of CrystalDiskInfo and CrystalDiskMark

 

http://www.pilipali.info/misc/force3_poor_results.jpg

 

Help please... :[pouts:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post 'AS SSD' too. I'd like to see what driver is running. I've seen about 5 reviews for this drive and they have me wondering if I should refuse delivery of mine this week. The benchmarks were all over the place.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.pilipali.info/misc/asbench.jpg

 

AS Bench isn't looking any better..

 

 

But then here comes ATTO.. I'm confused.. :confused:

 

http://www.pilipali.info/misc/atto.jpg

 

I've seen about 5 reviews for this drive and they have me wondering if I should refuse delivery of mine this week. The benchmarks were all over the place.

 

Links to the reviews?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have any way to separate this drive from being the system (operating system drive) and checking it that way? I mean, put another drive that has w7 already on it and put Force 3 onto another sata port and test. I'm not sure you will see a big change but maybe worth a try. Does the drive still have over 50% capacity available? It seems like you have ACHI enabled in the BIOS right? I would go through every Bios setting carefully and check to make sure that the different settings are complimenting of each other. Then install Intel® Rapid Storage Technology application for your specific OS and see what it says. Possibly try a different intel chipset driver, maybe an older version of the ICH9 instead of ICH10 (which I've read caused issues with some ssd's). I'm running an old P35 chipset board with a c300 with ICH9 drivers and my scores from 8k and below are higher than yours. I think something is definately wrong but then again, all the reviews are showing inconsistent results that are difficult to compare. I pm'd that link too you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The basic performance is fine but I have to wonder if there are faster drives for the same money out there. Then again the boost from the traditional HDD is huge.. Getting another 120GB Force 3 down the road and making it RAID 0 would boost the performance even more. Dunno.. for some reason after reading other SATA3 based SSD drives hitting such high results in random read/write tests I guess I was expecting more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For comparison:

http://i609.photobucket.com/albums/tt179/Vantage72/V3-120GBASSSD.png

 

Hi!

 

Just installed my system with the new Force 3 120GB SSD and the results are somewhat poor. I get pretty much same results as I would be running a SATA II SSD.

 

Could you run the AS-SSD compression benchmark and file copy benchmark? Thanks in advance.

 

 

Post 'AS SSD' too. I'd like to see what driver is running. I've seen about 5 reviews for this drive and they have me wondering if I should refuse delivery of mine this week. The benchmarks were all over the place.

 

Where did you see those?

 

The AS-SSD shots in this thread look bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that excessive testing isn't good for the disk :P esp as and crystaldiskmark.. and it was actually at competing manufacturers FAQ that said it :P I think I'll just stick with the disk since I got it at good price. Maybe get another one down the road and put them in raid 0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

0 fill data isn't representative for normal usage. It will make the Sandforce SSDs look really fast because the controller can compress it to the max.

 

Real world data is something else. This is why I asked the OP to post AS-SSD compression and file copy benchmark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Corsair Employees
Our Force drive benchmarks are all done with ATTO and what you should use to compare the performance. ATTO uses uncompressed data to compile the results, while other bench marks use compression and why they give results that are not consistent. Sandforce uses compression in the controller so if a test uses compressed data that test will show slower results. I would stronly suggest using ATTO for the comparrison other wise the results you get may not be accurate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm currently in the market to buy a 128GB SSD, and was keen to hear more when I heard about Corsair releasing their new F3 series. But, ignoring ATTO - which gives artificially high results as the data is too easily compressed, the performance results posted here are poor, especially the seq read which is at least 50% less than what it should be.

 

It's certainly put me off making an instant purchase. Maybe someone can re-assure me and post some good results with AS SSD results and Crystal Disk Mark?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

0 fill data isn't representative for normal usage. It will make the Sandforce SSDs look really fast because the controller can compress it to the max.

 

Real world data is something else. This is why I asked the OP to post AS-SSD compression and file copy benchmark.

 

Yeah, the AS SSD results look quite disappointing for the sequentials but the random numbers look good. Not bad but for a new series of SSD not great. I had been holding out on my next purchase until I saw the Force 3 results.

 

ATTO gives you no measure of real-world performance IMO. Most data nowadays is incompressible - it is mostly already compressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...