Posted June 6, 2017 So I just installed a Seagate FireCuda SSHD in my desktop via SATA 3 and I ran ATTO to check the speed and under the 4k tests has very poor read performance. Is this normal for an SSHD? I've only owned normal HDD's before and the speed was higher at 0.5. My Reviews: Sennheiser HD 518 Mayflower Electronics ODAC/O2 Review My Tutorials: How To Play Crysis on Linux in DirectX 10 with DXVK Splinter Cell Conviction General Protection Fault Fix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted June 6, 2017 I don't know if this is normal or not but I think it is a bit on the slow side probably. Neither am I familiar with this program but I do know that SSHDs are neat in that they will become faster for items you access often. The more you are using a particular file on your computer, the faster accessing it will be because the drive will learn what things you use most commonly and it will prioritize those things. ⬇ - PC specs down below - ⬇ The Impossibox CPU: (x2) Xeon X5690 12c/24t (6c/12t per cpu) Motherboard: EVGA Super Record 2 (SR-2) RAM: 48Gb (12x4gb) server DDR3 ECC GPU: MSI GTX 1060 Gaming X 6GB Case: Modded Lian-LI PC-08 Storage: Samsung 850 EVO 500Gb and a 2Tb HDD PSU: 1000W something or other I forget Display(s): 24" Acer G246HL Cooling: (x2) Corsair H100i v2 Keyboard: Corsair Gaming K70 LUX RGB MX Browns Mouse: Logitech G600 Headphones: Sennheiser HD558 Operating System: Windows 10 Pro Folding info so I don't lose it: WhisperingKnickers Join us on the x58 page it is awesome! x58 Fan Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted June 6, 2017 That's expected. For one hard drives have abysmal 4K performance. On another SSHDs don't suddenly give you the performance of an SSD and they should be smart enough now to figure out what to keep and what not to keep. So running a benchmark once isn't going to give you representative results of using cache only. I have a blog! And a list of guides I've posted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted June 6, 2017 Author 2 minutes ago, WhisperingKnickers said: I don't know if this is normal or not but I think it is a bit on the slow side probably. Neither am I familiar with this program but I do know that SSHDs are neat in that they will become faster for items you access often. The more you are using a particular file on your computer, the faster accessing it will be because the drive will learn what things you use most commonly and it will prioritize those things. Yea I know all that I'm just curious why the read speeds in the benchmark seem low. So far the drive is actually pretty fast but thats was just something i was curious about. My Reviews: Sennheiser HD 518 Mayflower Electronics ODAC/O2 Review My Tutorials: How To Play Crysis on Linux in DirectX 10 with DXVK Splinter Cell Conviction General Protection Fault Fix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted June 6, 2017 Author Just now, M.Yurizaki said: That's expected. For one hard drives have abysmal 4K performance. On another SSHDs don't suddenly give you the performance of an SSD and they should be smart enough now to figure out what to keep and what not to keep. So running a benchmark once isn't going to give you representative results of using cache only. I ran it twice and the results were identical each time. I don't expect the SSD to take over right away but I thought fir sure the first read would be from the disk. Maybe there's something with the firmware that makes it have poor small read speed. My Reviews: Sennheiser HD 518 Mayflower Electronics ODAC/O2 Review My Tutorials: How To Play Crysis on Linux in DirectX 10 with DXVK Splinter Cell Conviction General Protection Fault Fix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted June 6, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kilobytez95 said: I ran it twice and the results were identical each time. I don't expect the SSD to take over right away but I thought fir sure the first read would be from the disk. Maybe there's something with the firmware that makes it have poor small read speed. Now that I thought about it more, you may never get the faster performance to show on a benchmark. Storage benchmarks create a temporary file that they do work on, then delete it. Since the file only exists once as far as the drive is concerned, it won't be cached. I have a blog! And a list of guides I've posted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted June 6, 2017 Author Just now, M.Yurizaki said: Now that I thought about it more, you may never get the faster performance. Storage benchmarks create a temporary file that they do work on, then delete it. Since the file only exists once as far as the drive is concerned, it won't be cached. Yea true but that doesn't really explains the poor read prefomance from disk. Weirdly the write is way way higher in comparison. My Reviews: Sennheiser HD 518 Mayflower Electronics ODAC/O2 Review My Tutorials: How To Play Crysis on Linux in DirectX 10 with DXVK Splinter Cell Conviction General Protection Fault Fix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now