+ Intel(R) 100 Series/C230 Chipset Family SATA AHCI Controller Both of these acts will place a lot of stress on the drive in terms of doing writes.Īsfor not being able to resume from hibernation, are you sure it doesn't just take a long time? With that much data it surely would.ĬrystalDiskInfo 7.6.0 (C) 2008-2018 hiyohiyo I believe this is related to using way more memory than you have room for in RAM, as well as hibernating. I can't explain the descrepency in speed, but I am concerned by that health level.
#Slow down kigb rom install#
The laptop also has a 1TB Samsung 970 Evo, but I haven't switched over to the Windows 10 Pro install on it yet, mainly due to the seemingly insurmountable ordeal of reinstalling and reconfiguring all my programs, apps, etc. I tried taking a video of it once, but the camera's frame rate was too low.
#Slow down kigb rom full#
Interestingly, they give me full transfer rates (~500+ MB/s) if I put them in my desktop (built Jan 2015: ASRock Z97 Extreme6, i7-4790K, 32GB DDR3-1600, GTX 1060 3GB).Īlso could the low space on (the 250GB MX200 - that's drive C, damn emotes breaking the standard shorthand) combined with often using upwards of 45-60 GB RAM, be a factor in being unable to properly resume from hibernation? (It will show a black screen after the Windows logo, and if you look carefully and the room is fairly dark, you can see what I'd guess is the backlight or something gray flashing very briefly once per second. (Was about 24GB before I moved Rocket League and a few other GB of data to one of the MX300s.) Also the 250GB MX200 shows about 51% life or so in CrystalDiskInfo.
#Slow down kigb rom free#
The MX300s each have < 60-90 GB free (both show red bars in Windows Explorer "This PC"), and the MX300 has 37GB free. I wonder if this could be why my 3 SATA SSDs in my laptop could be only doing about 100-130 or so MB/s in sequential CrystalDiskMark, or large file transfers? The laptop (bought Dec 2015, some parts upgraded later but boot SSD is within a couple months of that age) is a Clevo P750DM-G with an i7-6700K, 64GB DDR4-2133 & GTX 970M 6GB, and the SSDs are a 250GB M.2 Crucial MX200 (boot) and 2x 1050GB 2.5" Crucial MX300s. However, for an SSD, you should keep between 20%-25% free space to get the best performance and write life, especially the latter. This benchmarks measures performance (on the y axis) vs used space (on the x axis):įor best operation, you should keep 10-15% free space (empty space) on an HDD. Here you can see an example of this effect. For this reason, writing new data will be slow, unless space near the outside is reopened by deleting files, and reading will be slow from the inside (new data), but would remain fast for "old data" that's stored near the outside. Due to HDD disks having uniform data density, this means that as they spin, fewer bits are moving under the read/write head per second vs what happens when reading from or writing to the outside edge of the disk. Therefore, by the time the drive is nearly full, the new data you're adding is being put on the inside of the disk. By default, HDDs will write to the outside of the disk (platters), moving inward as more data is stored. HDDs will lose read and write speeds as they fill up, but for a different reason. I would like to provide an example of this effect the way I have for the HDD below but sadly it seems most people only test the first ~10% of their SSDs or so, and as a result any images you see of this test will show no degradation in performance. This shouldn't really be noticeable until you get it ~70% full or more. Read speeds however shouldn't be noticeably impacted. This of course is slower, and will wear the drive out faster. This is because they aim to write new data to unused space whenever possible, but as they fill and this becomes impossible, they have to go back to space that is already used and add more to it, which involves reading from it, adding the new data, then writing that back to the SSD. SSDs will wear faster and lose write speed as they fill up.
0 kommentar(er)
