Articles: Storage

Bookmark and Share

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 ]

Defragmentation Time and Performance in WinRAR

As we have already mentioned in the description of our testing methodology, SSDs do not need defragmentation and may even suffer from it. But why would we give up a good benchmark? You will see in just a minute that this test is indeed great.

As we see, the results are extremely interesting. The defragmentation time of the leader and the outsider differs by more than 1.5 times. The leader is Intel 510 250 GB (remember that this SSD won in the NASPT: HD Playback and Record test) and the outsider – OCZ Vertex 2.

Vertex 3 drives also did very well in this test. In fact, they alternate with Intel SSDs at the top of the diagram. Crucial m4 also did well.

The next test measures archiving speed – a large number of small files are being read from the drive and compressed into one larger file:

Since archiving is very CPU-dependent (we use default archiving settings), the results of different SSDs do not differ as much as in the previous test. But this is exactly what happens in real life. There are drive-dependent tasks and there are the opposite. For example, in this test the performance difference between the fastest and the slowest drive is 6.5%, which is not too much at all. And the winner is Vertex 3!

And what is going to happen when we will be extracting files from the archive? In this case the SSD utilization will be much higher, because a lot of smaller files will be written on it:

Vertex 3 SSDs are winning and in this case the interface influence on the results is minimal. The performance difference between the fastest and slowest disk in this test is 24%, although in absolute terms 5 seconds is pennies.

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 ]


Comments currently: 13
Discussion started: 07/11/11 09:24:11 PM
Latest comment: 12/16/15 10:25:31 PM

View comments

Add your Comment