Articles: Storage

Bookmark and Share

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 ]


Next goes our homemade test of defragmentation speed. We created a very defragmented file system on a 32GB partition of a disk by loading it with music, video, games and applications. Then we saved a per-sector copy of the disk and now copy it to the disk we want to test. The tested disk is connected to the mainboard’s SATA controller whose operation mode (AHCI/Standard SATA) is controlled from the mainboard’s BIOS. Next we run a script that evokes the console version of the Perfect Disk 8.0 defragmenter and marks the time of the beginning and end of the defragmentation process. AHCI is turned on. You can refer to this article for details about this test.

Strictly speaking, this test makes no practical sense for solid state drives because there is nothing to defragment on them. Every memory cell is equivalent to any other, so defragmentation won’t have any effect. However, this test will allow us to compare how much time SSDs spend reading and writing the same amount of small data blocks.

The X25-M is ahead as it is generally better than its opponents at processing small data blocks. The X128 and P128 take twice the amount of time to perform the task, the P128 being somewhat better of the two: the Samsung controller must be better under this load although the Indilinx-based X128 has been generally faster at writing throughout this test session.

The three JMicron-based SSDs take far more time for defragmentation and differ with their results. The Transcend is ahead, obviously due to its SLC memory. It is hard to explain why the PQI is ahead of the Apacer here. Perhaps it is due to its larger capacity. Anyway, these SSDs both show very bad results here.

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 ]


Comments currently: 2
Discussion started: 01/19/10 01:55:28 AM
Latest comment: 01/31/10 02:36:16 AM

View comments

Add your Comment