[SOLVED] Crucial SSD 1TB speed not good?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Q

Quast.3

Commendable
Oct 29, 2019
15
1
1,515
Hi,

I upgraded my HDD to "Crucial BX500 1TB 3D NAND SATA 2.5-Inch Internal SSD, up to 540MB/s - CT1000BX500SSD1Z". When I test the speed using "OPTIMUM SSD Tool" I get this reads:
[ Read : 388.03 MB/s // Write: 324.47 MB/s ]
But what I read about the driver is should reach more than 500MB/s !! I don't know where is the problem. Is it from the SSD, or from the SATA cable, or Motherboard? Could anyone help me with is?
 
Solution
E
so the "problem" is that the ssd that u bought has no cache and so if it has to do random writes and random reads it has trouble whit that if you do simular data transfer its going to reach 500mB-s the advantage whit dram cach is that it can read random files an whrite random files faster because its first stores it in the cache so the speeds you get are normal

to realy get it watch this video
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybIXsrLCgdM
Sort by date Sort by votes
What motherboard is this on?

Also, test with CrystalDiskMark and post the screencap here.
(upload your pic to imgur.com and post the link)

Lastly, the BX500 is pretty mediocre. If you just did this upgrade, you should have gone with the MX500 instead.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I feel like those DRAMless SATA SSD marketing target is uninformed consumers... There is no reason to spend nearly as much for those BX, Green, Plus drives over DRAM cache SSD's.. Same goes to QVO drives IMO
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
USAFRet said:
What motherboard is this on?

Also, test with CrystalDiskMark and post the screencap here.
(upload your pic to imgur.com and post the link)

Lastly, the BX500 is pretty mediocre. If you just did this upgrade, you should have gone with the MX500 instead.
Click to expand...
My spes:
--------
Asus RAMPAGE IV FORMULA
Intel Core i7-3930K
Nvidia GTX 680
Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 C9 4x4GB
--------
Here is the result
speeds.png

I don't know the different between MX500 and BX500. I just saw the price and the details/information page. Both were good to push me to buy it. Now, I have speed headache !!!

Pextaxmx said:
I feel like those DRAMless SATA SSD marketing target is uninformed consumers... There is no reason to spend nearly as much for those BX, Green, Plus drives over DRAM cache SSD's.. Same goes to QVO drives IMO
Click to expand...
What you mean? I did not get your point.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Quast.3 said:
Hi,

I upgraded my HDD to "Crucial BX500 1TB 3D NAND SATA 2.5-Inch Internal SSD, up to 540MB/s - CT1000BX500SSD1Z". When I test the speed using "OPTIMUM SSD Tool" I get this reads:
[ Read : 388.03 MB/s // Write: 324.47 MB/s ]
But what I read about the driver is should reach more than 500MB/s !! I don't know where is the problem. Is it from the SSD, or from the SATA cable, or Motherboard? Could anyone help me with is?
Click to expand...
Boot the machine and let it sit for 5 mins.
Run this.................... PC Benchmark
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
USAFRet said:
That's why you do research and ask questions before the money happens.
AN MX500 would get much closer to that 500-550 number. Both read and write.
Click to expand...
This mean I got cheated? This SSD will not cross 500MB/s? For what they made it?
NightHawkRMX said:
You won't be able to tell the difference in performance for most uses, just don't loon at a benchmark all day long.
Click to expand...
So what to do? How to solve speed problem?
Bob.B said:
Boot the machine and let it sit for 5 mins.
Run this.................... PC Benchmark
Click to expand...
Here is the result. It worst than I expected!!!
Opera-Snapshot-2021-03-06-101306-www-userbenchmark-com.png
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The BX isn't necessarily a bad drive. Being dramless is certainly not a good thing, but you can still have a decent experience with the drive. I had a PC with a Team Group CX2 1tb SSD, which is similar to a BX500. Same controller, only difference is Toshiba TLC not Micron TLC. It felt just as fast as my PC with a Sabrant Rocket Q 1tb NVME (which has both DRAM and SLC cache) for the tasks I threw at it, despite the worse drive and honestly worse CPU that PC had.

If you can return it and get a MX500, do that. If not, I just suggest you don't dwell on the benchmark speeds, and just use the drive. It will most likely feel very fast and snappy for day to day usage.

I don't have any problem with DRAMless drives performance, but some people do. YMMV
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
NightHawkRMX said:
From what I gather this is your boot drive. Windows is constantly using the drive in the background, even if you are not doing anything, meaning this will lower benchmark speeds.
Click to expand...
Yes, It's my boot driver. That is why I bought it. I think this is like "SAMSUNG 870 QVO". Which is different from "SAMSUNG 870 EVO" in speed and performance. Before I was using Kingstone 120GB SSD and it was great. I can notes the different now.
USAFRet said:
No, you didn't get 'cheated'. You just didn't do your research before buying.
If you had asked, anyone here would have said buy the MX, not the BX.
And don't use userbenchmark for this testing. It is a poor tool.
Click to expand...
You right. I have to accept it.
NightHawkRMX said:
The BX isn't necessarily a bad drive. Being dramless is certainly not a good thing, but you can still have a decent experience with the drive. I had a PC with a Team Group CX2 1tb SSD, which is similar to a BX500. Same controller, only difference is Toshiba TLC not Micron TLC. It felt just as fast as my PC with a Sabrant Rocket Q 1tb NVME (which has both DRAM and SLC cache) for the tasks I threw at it, despite the worse drive and honestly worse CPU that PC had.
If you can return it and get a MX500, do that. If not, I just suggest you don't dwell on the benchmark speeds, and just use the drive. It will most likely feel very fast and snappy for day to day usage.
I don't have any problem with DRAMless drives performance, but some people do. YMMV
Click to expand...
I can't return it now. What done is done. I have to use it for years now until something new come-up. Life wants more money from me than my PC.
Bob.B said:
Do it again.
Reboot.....wait 5 mins.......run the benchmark......but this time just post a link to the results.
Click to expand...
Nothing change. still bad result. Look, if you know something/option will help me to improve it, write it please. Make tests will not change anything.
-----------------------------------------
Thank you so much guys for helping me to understand my issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NightHawkRMX
Upvote 0 Downvote
Quast.3 said:
Yes, It's my boot driver. That is why I bought it. I think this is like "SAMSUNG 870 QVO". Which is different from "SAMSUNG 870 EVO" in speed and performance. Before I was using Kingstone 120GB SSD and it was great. I can notes the different now.

You right. I have to accept it.

I can't return it now. What done is done. I have to use it for years now until something new come-up. Life wants more money from me than my PC.

Nothing change. still bad result. Look, if you know something/option will help me to improve it, write it please. Make tests will not change anything.
-----------------------------------------
Thank you so much guys for helping me to understand my issue.
Click to expand...
If you post a link it shows more info that what your screenshot shows.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
elias456 said:
do you understand the problem now ?
Click to expand...
No!! What do you see? where is the problem here?
Bob.B said:
OK you are plugged into the red/sata 3 port.
It's quite likely the speed you are seeing is the limit of that disk.
If you want to play move the ssd cable to each red port and test.
Click to expand...
All my cables for my SSD and HDD plug-in into the red sata port
IuEuBe5.jpg

You want me to remove all my cables and test one by one of each red sata port?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
so the "problem" is that the ssd that u bought has no cache and so if it has to do random writes and random reads it has trouble whit that if you do simular data transfer its going to reach 500mB-s the advantage whit dram cach is that it can read random files an whrite random files faster because its first stores it in the cache so the speeds you get are normal

to realy get it watch this video
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybIXsrLCgdM
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom