hdparm read speed survey

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
Since I started doing this tonight, I figured why not make it a bit more formal.

Steps to run:
1. Using Ubuntu/ Debian: apt-get install hdparm

2. Figure out what your drive is called in /dev/ e.g. /dev/sda or /dev/nvme0n1

3. Run this command (replace sdb with your device):
Code:
hdparm -tT --direct /dev/sdb
Enter information in the survey form. I will post results in a week or two if we get a good number of results:
hdparm.xlsx

In the event anyone is wondering, the particular hdparm test came from an Intel document.
 

MiniKnight

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2012
3,009
920
113
NYC
Added WD Red. I thought the numbers were wrong then I realized that the first one is CACHED

I entered the TB figure without the "TB" so just 4000. Is that right?
 

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
Yes that is correct. I can filter it out later in Excel if needed.
 

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
Sweet - 7 people and 15 drive models tested thus far. It seems like the S3500 is popular!
 

skelleton

Member
Nov 4, 2015
47
10
8
121
Added a few results,
If I get all the parts for the new server by the weekend Ill be able to add to add a SanDisk Extreme Pro and an Intel x25m g2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patrick

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
Awesome thanks! We are closing in on 60 results already.
 

Chuckleb

Moderator
Mar 5, 2013
1,017
331
83
Minnesota
It might be interesting to know what controller you are plugging into. I lose about 20MB/s going from a m1015 to onboard SATA ports on my X8DTL-iF motherboard.
 

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
That is really cool @Chuckleb - what drive?

I somewhat wanted to see if we would get any submissions on this (hence why such a quick benchmark.) It turns out we are closing in on 100 submissions now.
 

Chuckleb

Moderator
Mar 5, 2013
1,017
331
83
Minnesota
Hrm, that was on my Samsung drives. Running against my spinners shows no difference. Odd, wonder if my 840 Pros are doing something weird.

@Patrick: There are definitely differences on some drives, others not so much. These are 3x the tests and picking the middle result.

Code:
Samsung 840Pro

m1015
/dev/sdb:
Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   490 MB in  2.01 seconds = 244.09 MB/sec
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 762 MB in  3.01 seconds = 253.30 MB/sec

Onboard
[root@workbench ~]# hdparm -tT --direct /dev/sdb
/dev/sdb:
Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   452 MB in  2.01 seconds = 225.22 MB/sec
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 678 MB in  3.01 seconds = 225.35 MB/sec
-------
Seagate 3TB
m1015
/dev/sdb:
Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   470 MB in  2.00 seconds = 234.95 MB/sec
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 516 MB in  3.00 seconds = 171.83 MB/sec

Onboard:
/dev/sdc:
Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   444 MB in  2.00 seconds = 221.61 MB/sec
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 514 MB in  3.00 seconds = 171.30 MB/sec
-------
Smart 256GB mSATA
m1015
/dev/sdb:
 Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   488 MB in  2.01 seconds = 243.29 MB/sec
 Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 738 MB in  3.00 seconds = 245.70 MB/sec

Onboard
/dev/sdb:
 Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   454 MB in  2.00 seconds = 226.48 MB/sec
 Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 670 MB in  3.01 seconds = 222.74 MB/sec
 
Last edited:

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
@Chuckleb Hopefully I will have a system this weekend to test on.

BTW we are at 99 results!!! I just tried two SanDisk Cloudspeed Ascends 960GB in the datacenter:
Code:
/dev/sdi:
Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   256 MB in  2.01 seconds = 127.62 MB/sec
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 536 MB in  3.00 seconds = 178.62 MB/sec
lvadmin@asusrs500:~$ sudo hdparm -tT --direct /dev/sdh

/dev/sdh:
Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   246 MB in  2.00 seconds = 123.00 MB/sec
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 236 MB in  3.01 seconds =  78.30 MB/sec
lvadmin@asusrs500:~$ sudo hdparm -tT --direct /dev/sdg
That is absolutely wild! I did "dmesg | grep -i sata" and the link speeds are 6.0 Gbps.

Edit: Tried re-formatting the disk and the speeds are the same.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: T_Minus

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
What is the difference between the two tests? Just different disks? Same controller?
2 drives of the same model, same controller. And slower than hard drives. Intel DC S3700's on the same controller are normal speeds and WD 4TB drives on the same controller are also faster.
 

Laugh|nGMan

Member
Nov 27, 2012
33
7
8
Link with survey form don't work anymore.
Tested Intel® SSD 311 Series 20GB SATA 3Gb/s on W2012r2 Hyper-v host + CentOS7 guest
O_DIRECT cached reads: 230 MB/sec
O_DIRECT disk reads: 246 MB/sec

Tested bit on host with SQLIO. 6Gb testfile
8K random reads
C:\SQLIO\SQLIO.EXE -s60 -kR -frandom -b8 -t8 -o16 -LS -BN E:\SQLIOtestfile.dat
4ms access 226Mb/s 29k IO/s

Sequential 512KB reads
C:\SQLIO\SQLIO.EXE -s60 -kR -fsequential -b512 -t2 -o16 -LS -BN E:\SQLIOtestfile.dat
274Mb/s
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patrick

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,168
5,234
113
OK here is something really interesting. 800GB TXA2D2 on a LSI SAS3008 mezzanine card in an Intel S2600WTT server (controller and server unboxed today):

Code:
root@intel-2u2v3:~$ lsblk
NAME    MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE  MOUNTPOINT
sda       8:0    0 745.2G  0 disk
└─sda1    8:1    0 745.2G  0 part
sdb       8:16   0 372.6G  0 disk
sdc       8:32   0 372.6G  0 disk
sdd       8:48   0 745.2G  0 disk
└─sdd1    8:49   0 745.2G  0 part
sde       8:64   0 447.1G  0 disk
└─sde1    8:65   0 335.4G  0 part
  └─md0   9:0    0 335.2G  0 raid1 /
sdf       8:80   0 447.1G  0 disk
└─sdf1    8:81   0 335.4G  0 part
  └─md0   9:0    0 335.2G  0 raid1 /
root@intel-2u2v3:~$ sudo hdparm -tT --direct /dev/sda
[sudo] password for root:

/dev/sda:
 Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   316 MB in  2.00 seconds = 157.98 MB/sec
 Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 306 MB in  3.00 seconds = 101.96 MB/sec
Very interesting given the Cloudspeed Ascend 960GB hdparm speeds I saw.

The strange thing is that these same drives benchmark well in Windows.
 

whitey

Moderator
Jun 30, 2014
2,774
869
113
39
Bolting these 'Friday surprises' up right now to join in on the fun.

Will report back shortly w/ results to add to the growing list.

EDIT:
cached reads: 455.55 MB/sec
disk reads: 477.78 MB/sec

I added it to your hosted xls sheet as well. Take care, really diggin these drives, just wish I had bigger drives.

I have a 'while true; do hdparm -tT --direct /dev/sdb; sleep 20; done' loop murderin' that disk for abt an hour or so to burn in to try to provide the most accurate results.



hgst-hussl4010bss60-ssds.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Patrick

whitey

Moderator
Jun 30, 2014
2,774
869
113
39
Anywhere to see full/live results or are we at the mercy of the old xls results screenshot above? Would really like to see some Intel 750 NVMe drive results as that is abt the sanest entry point inot NVMe it seems to start (400GB model probably).

Thx all, whitey