Hardware Canucks

Hardware Canucks (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/)
-   Troubleshooting (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/troubleshooting/)
-   -   Slow Kingston Hyperx 3K Write (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/troubleshooting/60695-slow-kingston-hyperx-3k-write.html)

LegendMask April 13, 2013 03:31 PM

Slow Kingston Hyperx 3K Write
I had this SSD for about two weeks maybe, however Im having problems with the writing speed as its not close to the advertised speed.


I did all the troubleshooting and settings to make sure its setup correctly with no success. Such as;
- AHCI Mode.
- Check Sata Cables (6Gb).
- Connected to the intel chipset 6Gb port.
- Took my SSD out of the drive bay (800D) and connect it directly the MOBO.
- Updated all drivers available for update (BIOS,Chipset...) haven't found anything from kingston.
- Turned off Kaspersky Internet Security.
- Didnt use any programs in the background while testing.
- Did the Sean's guide on SSD from OC.net forum

I might have done more things I forget about it already. Any suggestion? or should I send this driver back while I have the chance?

AkG April 13, 2013 03:39 PM

DL and run TRIM check. Two weeks is about right for how long it would take for the smaller SF2281 drives to start getting 'slow'.

Get it here:
Index of /trimcheck

Its a cmd line program

Copy it to the SSD. run it from the cmd line. wait 30sec to 1minute. run again.

Little blurb on it:
" When executed for the first time it will write on specific locations on the SSD. It will then delete the written data and exit. When you run it a second time a minute later, it will try to read the exact same locations. When TRIM works you'll get zeroes on the sectors it wrote, plus a notification that TRIM works. If the data is still there you'll be notified that TRIM is not working. If you get a negative result and fsutil tells you that TRIMis enabled anway, try to wait 10 min or before running it for a third time."

IF it comes back and says that trim is working...return the drive...its a dud. IF trim is NOT working....then you got a decision to make 1) nuke and pave (and then try again to confirm TRIM is working) or 2) get a different ssd (intel 520, M500, etc) that can take care of itself via either ITGC or software. :thumb:

Hope that helps.

LegendMask April 13, 2013 04:23 PM

Thanks a lot for your help.

The results came in zero's and its working. So should I replace it? or go for another SSD?

might have to check with NCIX what are my options.

LegendMask April 13, 2013 06:02 PM

any other inputs?

AkG April 13, 2013 06:03 PM

Good so trim is working. Thats 'step one' out of the way. :)

Run the full CDM test.

See what the 4K write results look like (dont worry about the other results. CDM uses incompressible data...which ALL SF2281's hate...so dont expect 500mb/s writes in CDM!!!).

If the 4k single queue depth write results are below 80 (and if its in really bad shape it will be in the 40s).... backup your data, do a secure erase on it, run it as a D drive in a different rig. IF its numbers are still in the gutter in CDM... its a dud. IF they get better than either something in your rig or software config...just does NOT like your SSD. IF that is the case I would return it and go for a NON-SF2281 based drive. Only SF2281 I would even consider is the Intel 520.

Be patient mate. I gashed open my hand 5 days ago (think 3 inchs by 1inch deep cut in the palm of my right hand that I had to glue together) so typing is slow and I am not at the PC all that much. Only reason Im even trying right now is because I try to help peeps out as much as I can

LegendMask April 13, 2013 06:17 PM

thanks for your input, I dont mind not getting the advertised speed which is 510MB/s,
which is most of the time is achieved under certain circumstances and conditions. But to lose %65 of its advertised speed is something to look into, and I hope you agree with me on that :biggrin:

did the test and the results are


unfortunately the only other rigs I have are imac and a laptop, so cant test it on other rig.

EDIT: Sorry about that buddy, I hope you get well soon. Worst case, Im gonna have to speak with NCIX about this and try to replace it, but your help is really appreciated bro. I have been in other forums but the help amounts I got on this forum is out of this world.

AkG April 13, 2013 06:38 PM

Thanks. I just reglued it and its healing nicely :)

Honestly....those numbers are in the right ballpark for where they should be.

IF you want to see the '510' they advertise...run ATTO. It plays to SF2281 drives strong points (ie you will only ever see 500+ on sequential performance, with large file sizes that is ALSO easily compressible data). Its all marketing / PR spin. All of them do it.

My advice...is use the drive and dont worry about synthetic test results. ie does the drive feel fast? or does it feel 'slow' in real world useage.

..OR return it (take the 15% restocking fee hit) and get a LARGER, newer drive that costs a crap ton more.

Sorry but thats basically your two options as that drive is running within spec...based on the limited data points. Its possible that it is wonky and Im wrong. It does happen, especially with only quick n dirty testing (ie Im good..but not that good...or that perfect. :P)

Hope that helps. Im crashing for the night, but will check the thread tomorrow to see if I can offer any more advice or help. :thumb:

LegendMask April 13, 2013 06:48 PM

I guess will stick to this drive not yet sure, performance wise its hella fast drive as it is my first SSD LoL, but I guess I got concerned after seeing other results with the same drive. and boot time is ~33 seconds till the desktop screen and ~40 seconds after all programs loads.

jurassic1024 April 14, 2013 03:24 PM

I thought the same thing as you when I saw the low CDM write performance, but after I got over that (I knew about how 2281 dealt with uncompressible files, and got the drive on sale for $99cdn), everything has been fine and I'm happy with it. BF3 multiplayer maps load very quickly, and I can reboot in 35 seconds, and boot up is just under that including the long ass time it takes for my system to post when the system has been off for a while. It's a mere 10-12 seconds starting at the Windows loading screen. It's a great drive, but will avoid SF drives in the future, assuming they are still around when the time comes to go for bigger capacity. Currently using the 120GB model with latest firmware.

stephengillon April 14, 2013 04:02 PM

its advertised at "up to 510mb/s" its the up to part that screws you.

lower capacity = slower speeds

either way your not gonna see a ssd for awhile write that fast

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:13 AM.