2 Replies Latest reply on Dec 1, 2011 9:43 AM by zzzz52

    Weird performance of G2 X25-M 160Gb SSD vs G2X25-M 80Gb

    zzzz52

      Hi,

       

      Hi, I have 2x G2 intel ssd - 160gB and 80gb. FYI, the 80gb is around 7months old and the 160gb is new. I have run some  performance test using HD tune to compare the performance. Below is the  screen shot for the test.  There is a big difference in the random test where:

       

      160gb = 4 IOPS, 242ms. 2.089MB/s
      80gb = 271IOPS, 3.7ms, 137.685MB/s

       

      It  is a big difference and I retested the 160gb again and the avg access  time will varies from 4000ms - >10000ms which is very long. but for  the 80gb, it is quite consistent and not as high as 160gb.
      All settings are the same.

       

      Is this abnormal or otherwise? Do I need to send back this SSD to claim warranty?

      As requested. For my intel G2 80gb vs 160gb SSD. It seems that the 160gb part is having a problem.

       

      http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3529/hdtunerandomaccessintel.png

      80gb

       

      http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/3529/hdtunerandomaccessintel.png

      160gb

       

      http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6019/26november2011195680gb.png

      80gb 2nd run

       

      http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/8678/26november20111956160gb.png

      160gb 2nd run

       

      Also I have performed some test using AS SSD and crystalmark. Below is the result

       

      AS SSD:

      http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/8761/asssdbenchintelssdsa2m0h.png

      80gb

      http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3329/asssdbenchintelssdsa2m1.png


      160gb

       

      Crystalmark:

       

      5x 100MB

      http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/6595/80gbk.png
      80gb

       

      http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/9763/160gbc.png

      160gb

       

      1x 100mb

       

      http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/375/100mb80gb.png

      80gb

      http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/5497/100mb160gb.png

      160gb

       

      1x 50mb

      http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/9000/50mb80gb.png

      80gb

       

      http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/817/50mb160gb.png

      160gb

       

      Even though for the 5x 100mb test is almost similar for both ssd, but i can notice during the test that for 160gb ssd the reading would drop to around 3MB/s during the 3 or 4 test point.

       

      Should I return it for an exchange?

       

      Please advise.

        • 1. Re: Weird performance of G2 X25-M 160Gb SSD vs G2X25-M 80Gb
          parsec

          That is a curious mix of results, in some cases the 160GB seems to have a problem, and in others it doesn't.  The AS SSD tests look fine for both drives, although the 160's 4K read might be better.  Those HD Tune latencies for the 160 do seem alarming.  Since the AS SSD results look normal, are you certain that during the HD Tune test on the 160 that nothing was running in the background on that PC that might disturb the test?

           

          Do you use the Intel SSD Toolbox?  If so, have you run the Optimizer on the 160, or ran the diagnostic tests on it?  If not, you should try it.  I assume these drives are running on the same SATA interface, which is what BTW?

           

          You also have two versions of HD Tune Pro in your results, the one is almost two years old.  The firmware on your 80GB drive is the older version, although that is not an issue.  I'm wondering if you use the Toolbox at all, or at least have not downloaded the latest version, 3.01.  What mother board are you using?

           

          Unless you've been using the Toolbox and have been testing this for a while, I suggest looking at it a little more before returning it, if possible.

          • 2. Re: Weird performance of G2 X25-M 160Gb SSD vs G2X25-M 80Gb
            zzzz52

            Yes, I do use the intel SSD toolbox 3.0.1. Perform the diagnostic but found no error and also perform the optimizer. I have rerun all the benchmark software to test it out and the outcome is still the same.

            So the conclusion can only be that it is a faulty drive. I have send back the unit for refund.

             

            Thx for the advise.