Intel 520 Series SSD - Poor Performance Issues

[idata]

CPU: 3770K

MB: DZ77GA-70K

SSD (Boot): Intel SSD 520 Series (120GB, 2.5in SATA 6Gb/s, 25nm, MLC)

HDD (Storage): WD Green Caviar, 3TB, SATA 6Gb/s

OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit

I have a the SSD on SATA port 0 and the HDD on SATA port 1 (the two blue ones). The BIOS was set to AHCI before I did a clean install of Windows 7. The BIOS is the latest version (0039).

I installed all the motherboard drivers (except Intel Rapid Storage Technology) and the Intel SSD Toolbox and ran the SSD Optimizer. Then I did this AS SSD Benchmark:

I then installed Intel Rapid Storage Technology and ran the AS SSD Benchmark again:

There was an overall decrease in performance.

Both times the Acc.time failed on the read test giving this error:

This is the first build I've done with an SSD so is there anything obvious I'm missing? I was excepting much closer to the promised 550Mb/s read and 500Mb/s write speeds.

One thing I thought may be causing the problems was using SATA 3Gb/s cables but I've read that it shouldn't have any effect.

Message was edited by: Will When I copy a 3GB file from my HDD to my SSD I'm getting about 30-40Mb/s transfer speeds. When I copy the same file from my SSD to my HDD I get upwards of 100Mb/s speeds.

[idata]

All X58 and P55 systems do not have Intel chipsets with SATA 6Gb/s support. That is provided by a Marvell chipset that is known for poor performance, due to their limitation of using one PCIe lane, so are limited to 5Gb/s at best. Plus the Marvell chipset and driver pair have lower high queue depth performance than the Intel SATA 3Gb/s ports and IRST AHCI/RAID driver pair.

The Intel 520 SSD has been found in reviews to be one of the highest performing SSDs available today. As an owner of X-25M G2 and 520 SSDs, I find it hard to understand how the G2 can outperform a 520, on any SATA interface, particularly with the G2's maximum sequential write performance of 80MB/s.

[JMadu1]

Agreed and in my case I am connected to the intel 3gbs controller which is faster and more stable than the marvel one in my units. I have no clue whatsoever why the x-25 is faster / more responsive but the difference is upsetting. For instance the windows 7 performance test disk transfer rate shows the x25M to be 7.8 whereas the 520 is 7.1. This has been repeated. - Even my older 2TB SATA hard drives show better than that.

I am clueless right now but will keep searching for a solution.

* i also see that intel has released 11.2.0.1006 version of the RST drivers so may try that tomorrow and see what happens.

If you think of anything else to try - please let me know

thanks

john

[idata]

I must say that i am having the same "issue" and i am very disappointed.

I have Asus Rampage IV Extreme (2011) and Intel i7 3930K with Intel 520, 180 GB SSD.

My cruical m4 128 GB is performing much better.

://

[idata]

Your M4 is on another PC, is it also a X79 chipset PC?

The RSTe driver on your X79 board does not quite perform in the same way as the usual IRST driver used on all other Intel chipset boards. Many SSD benchmark enthusiasts have found performance is better on PCs that use IRST with other chipsets.

You are also seeing, on AS SSD, the performance difference of the SandForce SSD controller when tested with all non-compressible data. The Marvell controller on a M4 is not affected by compressible and non-compressible data. Most other disk benchmark programs use compressible data, which the SandForce controller excels with.

If you check the detailed specs of the 520, there are two sections, one for compressible data, the other for non-compressible data. All SandForce based SSDs perform in this way, although Intel is the only one that notes this in their detailed specs.

[idata]

it was on the same PC.

What tests (at least 2, if possible) would you recommend me for compressed?

I just would like to make sure my SSD is good.

How this affect windows\games and everything? what kind of data is that?

In Games, Apps, would M4 be faster then 520?

Thanks