Anyone want to interpret these results?

  • SpinRite v6.1 Release #3
    Guest:
    The 3rd release of SpinRite v6.1 is published and may be obtained by all SpinRite v6.0 owners at the SpinRite v6.1 Pre-Release page. (SpinRite will shortly be officially updated to v6.1 so this page will be renamed.) The primary new feature, and the reason for this release, was the discovery of memory problems in some systems that were affecting SpinRite's operation. So SpinRite now incorporates a built-in test of the system's memory. For the full story, please see this page in the "Pre-Release Announcements & Feedback" forum.
    /Steve.
  • Be sure to checkout “Tips & Tricks”
    Dear Guest Visitor → Once you register and log-in please checkout the “Tips & Tricks” page for some very handy tips!

    /Steve.
  • BootAble – FreeDOS boot testing freeware

    To obtain direct, low-level access to a system's mass storage drives, SpinRite runs under a GRC-customized version of FreeDOS which has been modified to add compatibility with all file systems. In order to run SpinRite it must first be possible to boot FreeDOS.

    GRC's “BootAble” freeware allows anyone to easily create BIOS-bootable media in order to workout and confirm the details of getting a machine to boot FreeDOS through a BIOS. Once the means of doing that has been determined, the media created by SpinRite can be booted and run in the same way.

    The participants here, who have taken the time to share their knowledge and experience, their successes and some frustrations with booting their computers into FreeDOS, have created a valuable knowledgebase which will benefit everyone who follows.

    You may click on the image to the right to obtain your own copy of BootAble. Then use the knowledge and experience documented here to boot your computer(s) into FreeDOS. And please do not hesitate to ask questions – nowhere else can better answers be found.

    (You may permanently close this reminder with the 'X' in the upper right.)

merk

Member
Sep 19, 2020
8
3
USA
Not sure there is anything to see here, but I thought the SSDs should be more consistent. The 2 Samsung SSDs are in a RAID 0 array. They are probably around 5 years old now. I'm posting 2 runs that I did back to back.

Code:
  +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  | ReadSpeed: Hyper-accurate mass storage read-performance benchmark. rel 1 |
  |  Benchmarked values are in megabytes read per second at five locations.  |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Driv Size  Drive Identity     Location:    0      25%     50%     75%     100
---- ----- ---------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
 81  250GB Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB     338.1   476.0   391.3   530.7   405.6
 82  320GB WDC WD3200AAKS-00VYA0          74.9    71.7    64.4    54.7    35.9
  3  250GB Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB     301.8   454.6   334.6   528.4   380.8

                  Benchmarked: Saturday, 2020-12-26 at 19:41
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   See the ReadSpeed forums at forums.grc.com for help and community support. 


  +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  | ReadSpeed: Hyper-accurate mass storage read-performance benchmark. rel 1 |
  |  Benchmarked values are in megabytes read per second at five locations.  |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Driv Size  Drive Identity     Location:    0      25%     50%     75%     100
---- ----- ---------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
 81  250GB Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB     368.0   474.0   398.1   531.0   408.2
 82  320GB WDC WD3200AAKS-00VYA0          74.9    71.7    64.4    54.7    35.9
  3  250GB Samsung SSD 850 EVO 250GB     351.0   463.7   352.7   531.6   397.8

                  Benchmarked: Saturday, 2020-12-26 at 19:44
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   See the ReadSpeed forums at forums.grc.com for help and community support.
 
@merk : Look at the two runs of the WD drive in the middle. Each of the 5 run-to-run results are identical. That demonstrates that on your hardware (as everywhere else) the benchmark is rock solid... which means that the SSDs really ARE returning differing results. I believe this is due to varying levels of on-the-fly error correction being needed. I think we're going to be able to fix that in the future.