hIOmon SSD Performance Monitor - Understanding desktop usage patterns.

[Computurd]

Now I try to consider the IOPS that occurred in use vs the IOPS capability of my drive. To do this I consider average queue depth and average latency readings to get some ball park figures using the following formula:

Queue depth*(1/.latency in ms) = IOPS (in seconds)

Based on the average latency of 0.49ms

• Queue depth 1 x (1/0.00049) = 2,040 IOPS
• Queue depth 64 x (1/0.00049) = 130,612 IOPS

My average queue depth is 1.57

• 1.57 x (1/0.0049) = 3,204 IOPS

that cannot be correct, because you are assuming that the latency is always the same here. it isnt. it changes with QD, and also with the type of access that you are doing. mixed read/write kills latency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What I discover when I turn off the page file is that the average response time for a single SSD drops to the average level of an SSD Raid 0 array.

So no improvement on average latency or average queue depth with Raid 0 based on my storage demands.

what are you talking about? look at the numbers here...how can you say that it is the same level? they arent even close!! this is from the graphic above where you posted this, if you look at the numbers...



you have .0239 v .0051 that is over twice as fast! also, you have 474.8354ms v 132.0012ms that is a 3x difference!

can you highlight the numbers that show where average response time for a single SSD drops to the average level of an SSD Raid 0 array?? i mean not to be incredulous or anything, but i am

Consequently there is no significant average variable to generate more IOPS between the two configurations, although as per post #94 I can't even use anywhere close to the IOPS I get from a single drive.

well you have two programs requesting the same amount of information, correct? it is the latency of the IOPS that counts.

Looking at the individual processes I ran none of them could utilize the max sequential read speed capability of my SSD.

of course not. do the processes even max out the sequential read capability of your HDD? nope. again, not the amount, the latency is why they are faster. there are many programs that do not max out the speed of your hdd which are way faster with SSD. latency.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be great to get some feedback if I am looking at it incorrectly.

your thoughts on post 93? and this post? they both cover much the same info. maybe we are looking at different numbers.