Conned by OCZ - slow read, HDD speeds

snadge

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2011
11
0
18,520
After purchasing and installing a OCZ Agility 3 120Gb on SATA3 port (IDE) , I am getting HDD speeds on this SSD (with supposed 500MB/s read!!) i specifically spent more too buy a Sata3 board and Sata3 drive for the higher speeds...had I known I was going to get 146MB/s (I get 127MB/s on my HDD) I would have simply bought a Sata2 one and probably a different brand...

I think my stats have to be really bad..

http://i.imgur.com/1Y50DiX.png

http://i.imgur.com/Ks7ihGq.png

should I send it back to eBuyer as unsatisfied?

are there any SSD's out there that actually DO perform at the quoted speeds?


thanks
 
There is a chance that the drive has conterfiet nand memory. So you may want to send it back. Of course make sure you do a clean install with the sata set to achi mode3. but if that doesn't pan out send it back. Take a look at this.

http://thessdreview.com/daily-news/latest-buzz/manufacturer-shipped-review-sample-ssd-contains-fake-nand-flash-memory/
 

snadge

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2011
11
0
18,520
ive been told by staff at OCZ that my Marvell SATA3 ports on my Gigabyte H61-D3V are not really SATA3 speeds??? and thats why Iam getting poor speeds, AND I would do better on SATA2..???...that and the fact its IDE in Windows 8 (performs worse in 8 compared to 7) - surely if Gigabyte advertise as having SATA3 then it should support SATA3 speeds?

also, ive run HD Tune which says WARNING: 1 DAMAGED SECTOR HAS BEEN REPLACED, THIS DRIVE HAS DAMAGED SECTORS
 
SATA 3 (6Gb/s) speeds are from 301MB/s to 600MB/s.

So when you drive is in AHCI mode you will get over 300MB/s when benchmarking with ATTO, but you won't get the maximum advertised 525/500 Read/Write speeds.

Your motherboard does not have native Intel 6Gb/s ports. It uses a 3rd party Marvell 88SE9172 SATA 3 controller.
That controller operates at PCIe x1, so you won't get maximum advertised Read/Write speeds from any model SATA 3 SSD you connect to it.
 
I do not know who told you that Windows 8 performs worse than Windows 7 but they are full of *** period. I can't say about that board but I do have a OCZ Agility 3 120Gb running on my Asus Z77 Sabertooth as my boot up drive for Windows 8 and it runs quite well with it. Windows 8 WEI shows this drive at 7.9 so it may not be the fasted out there but it still much better than a standard HDD at 5.9.
 


They were saying that an SSD in IDE mode performs worse in Win8 than in Win7.
 

snadge

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2011
11
0
18,520
EDIT: i have found out that in last few weeks KingFast and possibly OCZ have been shipping drives with counterfeit memory that is slow..I think I might have one of these drives...also HD Tune says there are damaged sectors and 1 has been replaced!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://thessdreview.com/daily-news/latest-buzz/manufacturer-shipped-review-sample-ssd-contains-fake-nand-flash-memory/

see below....compare to screens in link above... so much for 85,000 IOPS on 4k random - couldnt even access the drive on the 512 read one!!

uEGYS7M.png


1Y50DiX.png


Ks7ihGq.png
 

snadge

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2011
11
0
18,520
...also, link in post no.2 does not work for windows 8 x64 - i tried it earlier - then i found a method for win8...that didnt work because I didnt understand where the 'something' folder was to delete the item named "3" with a value of "0" ??
 

sub mesa

Distinguished
As stated you use IDE mode which lowers the random I/O performance of multiqueue I/O.

You should not connect your SSD to a 'fake' additional chip like Marvell, but rather attach it to your chipset SATA controller which has lower (faster) latency and supports TRIM the way it should be. It also can operate in AHCI mode just fine.

But regardless, OCZ employs controllers that you should avoid. The better controllers Marvell and Intel are not used by OCZ. The Agility 3 is officially a SATA/600 SSD, but its true incompressible speeds betray that this is one of the slowest SSDs available. Just compare the AS SSD specs to a decent SSD like Samsung 830 or Crucial M4. In particular, compare a 60GB Sandforce drive to 60/64GB Crucial M4 and you will see a very large difference in both sequential and random I/O performance.