[SOLVED] SSD userbenchmark poor, any fixes?

Does it work

Commendable
Jun 3, 2017
174
29
1,640
8
Been recently "buffing" my desktop, few new parts and all that on a tight budget due to personal reasons. I've managed to improve the benchmark from quite poor all around (from below 30th percentile in many cases) to reasonable in most places, however no matter what I do, my ssd always returns bad percentiles. The below link is from a test i ran straight after a reboot (checking cpu usage in task manager before running was most definitely below 3%) and the results are still poor, im aware that cpu usage somewhat breaks the benchmark, but as i said when i ran the test it was definitely low usage, can any of you help? This was with cache enabled also.

https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/15466434

EDIT: Forgot to mention that both the WD blue (2012 version) and the SSD are new IE last couple weeks. I have just put them in using the SATA 3 6GB cables in the respective ports (can get a picture of my machines insides if you need)

Just for another sample, which shows the hard drive failing to live up to its expectations once more, this time without the warning for cpu usage.


Edit 2: Also, what would naturally be the next part to upgrade from what I have when I get ahold of the money? I would like to future proof the machine as much as possible, but on a pretty tight budget, and any recommendations on the part itself?
 
Last edited:

karenjoly

Respectable
Apr 13, 2018
1,329
20
1,815
205
That's the score that counts. You can see the ssd is a solid performer. I have never figured out why people would use a metric that is internet based . The userbench mark score is never correct . Even the positive scores are suspect. The better way to evaluate a component is to use the most commonly relied on individual metric for a component, run locally. Disks are best scored using disk test suites , like crystal disk mark 6. CPUs have a separate test, etc.
Next upgrade ? Get a 1080.
 
SATA II (revision 2.x) interface, formally known as SATA 3Gb/s, is a second generation SATA interface running at 3.0 Gb/s. The bandwidth throughput, which is supported by the interface, is up to 300MB/s.

Plus overheards, so I would say the analysis of the drive is probably correct - wrong sata port.

Also if it is your main drive, it is always doing something in the background which makes it slower anyway.


Intel® Q77 chipset :
4 x SATA 3Gb/s port(s), blue
2 x SATA 6Gb/s port(s), gray
 

Does it work

Commendable
Jun 3, 2017
174
29
1,640
8
like the message said, make sure it using sata3 port on the motherboard
the gray one

"4 x SATA 3Gb/s port(s), blue
2 x SATA 6Gb/s port(s), gray"
Realised I forgot some information such as that and so updated my question
 

Does it work

Commendable
Jun 3, 2017
174
29
1,640
8
SATA II (revision 2.x) interface, formally known as SATA 3Gb/s, is a second generation SATA interface running at 3.0 Gb/s. The bandwidth throughput, which is supported by the interface, is up to 300MB/s.

Plus overheards, so I would say the analysis of the drive is probably correct - wrong sata port.

Also if it is your main drive, it is always doing something in the background which makes it slower anyway.


Intel® Q77 chipset :
4 x SATA 3Gb/s port(s), blue
2 x SATA 6Gb/s port(s), gray
It's definitely in the grey port underneath the end of the GPU
 
Mar 13, 2019
2
0
10
0
I've had the same problem with my A400 Kingston SSD in userbenchmark.
Hooked it up with 3.0 cable, even replaced it, still the same notification that I should replace the cable.
I did a benchmark in Crystaldiskmark and there the bench and speeds are fine.
Could you try in Crystal disk mark to see what speeds you get there ?
 

karenjoly

Respectable
Apr 13, 2018
1,329
20
1,815
205
That's the score that counts. You can see the ssd is a solid performer. I have never figured out why people would use a metric that is internet based . The userbench mark score is never correct . Even the positive scores are suspect. The better way to evaluate a component is to use the most commonly relied on individual metric for a component, run locally. Disks are best scored using disk test suites , like crystal disk mark 6. CPUs have a separate test, etc.
Next upgrade ? Get a 1080.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS