Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers




  1. #1
    themaster1 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    44

    Default MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers

    I have installed the new AMD drivers (they weren't available previously for my board 970 Pro3 rev1.0)

    AMD drivers:


    Microsoft drivers:


    I don't find the results fantastic (slightly better write speed but a decrease in read speed... that's puzzling)
    This board is Sata3 (6gb/s), the ssd aswell

    Please offer your thoughts

  2. #2
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers

    What SSD is that? Reminds me of the Kingston V300, really certain variations of it seen recently, that are using asynchronous NAND chips that perform at a much lower speed.

    Otherwise the +/- few MB read and write speeds are normal for AS SSD, particularly for an OS drive.

    Try running the ATTO benchmark for results closer to the SSD's specs.

  3. #3
    profJim's Avatar
    profJim is online now Chief Munchkin + moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tacoma, WA. [USA]
    Posts
    7,811

    Default Re: MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers



    Results are similar to my former OCZ Agility2 60GB ssd with asynchronous Nand using sata2 bandwidth on my P35-DS3L.

    MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers-as_ssd-p35-ocz-agility2-ssd-60gb-1-fw1-25-2011-12-22-png
    Last edited by profJim; 01-27-2014 at 11:44 AM.
    Q9650 @ 4.10GHz [9x456MHz]
    P35-DS4 [rev: 2.0] ~ Bios: F14
    4x2GB OCZ Reaper PC2-8500 1094MHz @5-5-5-15
    MSI N460GTX Hawk Talon Attack (1GB) video card <---- SLI ---->
    Seasonic SS-660XP2 80 Plus Platinum psu (660w)
    WD Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB (data)
    Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD (boot)
    SLI @ 16/4 works when running HyperSLI
    Cooler Master 120XL Seidon push/pull AIO cpu water cooling
    Cooler Master HAF XB computer case (RC-902XB-KKN1)
    Asus VH242H 24" monitor [1920x1080]
    MSI N460GTX Hawk (1GB) video card
    Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 Speakers
    win7 x64 sp1 Home Premium
    HT|Omega Claro plus+ sound card
    CyberPower CP1500PFCLCD UPS
    E6300 (R0) @ 3.504GHz [8x438MHz] ~~ P35-DS3L [rev: 1.0] ~ Bios: F9 ~~ 4x2GB Kingston HyperX T1 PC2-8500, 876MHz @4-4-4-10
    Seasonic X650 80+ gold psu (650w) ~~ Xigmatek Balder HDT 1283 cpu cooler ~~ Cooler Master CM 690 case (RC-690-KKN1-GP)
    Samsung 830 128GB SSD MZ-7PC128B/WW (boot) ~~ WD Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB (data) ~~ ZM-MFC2 fan controller
    HT|Omega Striker 7.1 sound card ~~ Asus VH242H monitor [1920x1080] ~~ Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 Speakers
    win7 x64 sp1 Home Premium ~~ CyberPower CP1500PFCLCD U.P.S
    .


  4. #4
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers

    Prof Jim, you are right, the Transcend SSD320 series uses asynchronous NAND, as discussed in this review:

    AnandTech | Transcend SSD320 & SSD720 (256GB) Review

    A quote from this review:

    Asynchronous NAND has an enormous impact on incompressible sequential read speed as you can see above. The SSD320 and OCZ's Agility 3, another async NAND based SandForce SSD, perform poorly in this test. It's not a bug or error in our testing as I checked the product specs for the SSD320 and they specified that the maximum read speed for AS-SSD is 220MB/s. When using slower NAND, the performance will be handicapped in scenarios where the NAND is the bottleneck. In this case, the controller and SATA 6Gbps bus are capable of faster throughput but the NAND can't keep up.

    Using AS SSD to test that SSD is the worst case situation. The SandForce SSD controller has lower write performance with the all incompressible data that is used by AS SSD. Add to that the asynchronous NAND, and the results in the screenshot are typical. Note that this review tests the 256GB version of the SSD320, the smaller capacity (64GB) models will have lower performance.

  5. #5
    themaster1 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    44

    Default Re: MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers

    Alright so there's is no doubt about it now then (it sucks). Well that was my first ssd, it worked ok so far and didn't pay too much but still. I guess i'll take a samsung pro soon !

  6. #6
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers

    Some things to consider, most of the read and write speeds of your SSD are far faster than any HDD. Most people just look at the sequential read and write speeds, but the 4K speeds are really more important.

    This is the results for a Seagate Barracuda 1TB 7200RPM HDD in AS SSD:

    MS AHCi Vs AMD Drivers-ssd-seagate-barracuda-mbs-3-18-2012-png

    The read access time of this HDD is about 100 times slower than your SSD. The write access time is about 30 times slower than you SSD. The 4K file size read speed is under one MB/s.

    As I said earlier, Google on ATTO, download and run that benchmark, since it is not the worst case test that AS SSD is. Real world data is not the same as what is used by AS SSD.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •