Crystal Disk Mark Official Site
Deandra Schikora
Perhaps I should write something about the motivation about this question: I am trying to benchmark my ssd and compare some encryption solutions. But that's another question (Best way to benchmark different encryption solutions on my system). While surfing in the web about ssd's and benchmarking I have often seen users posting their CrystelDiskMark results in forums. So this is the only motivation for the question. I just want to do the same on linux. For my particular benchmarking see my other question.
I'd say fio would have no trouble producing those workloads. Note that despite its name CrystalDiskMark is actually a benchmark of a filesysystem on a particular disk - it can't do I/O raw to the disk alone. As such it will always have filesystem overhead in it (not necessarily a bad thing but something to be aware of e.g. because the filesystems being compared might not be the same).
I created a script that tries to replicate the behavior of crystaldiskmark 6 with fio, and I also added support for older tests (like the 512kb test) this answer is updated now a long while after I initially created it, the script has much needed improvements. A changelog is included for people who used earlier versions.
When you run the script it will ask you to configure it (options include: Target Directory, Loops, Size, Write zeroes and Legacy tests) every setting has a default if you don't type anything. To test a specific hard drive you need to first mount it and then type a full path to a directory on that hard drive in the prompt that asks what drive you want to test. While running the script creates hidden temporary files in the target directory which it cleans up after it finishes running. Even if you cancel the process while it is running with CTRL+C, it should still clean up the files.
Test results are displayed in two stages, Sequential and 4KB, the sequential read/write tests are done first and once they're finished they are displayed while the 4KB tests are running. If you cancel the process before the tests have been completed, any partial results will be displayed on exit.
Note that you may sometimes get slightly off results, especially if you're doing something in the background while the tests are running, so running the test twice in a row to compare results is advisable.
In the new version of the script the 4KB and 512KB tests will be significantly faster since they no longer use the actual full size the user defines. (Crystaldiskmark will also skimp on size for the 4KB tests or they would always take forever).
I personally used iozone a lot while benchmarking and stress testing devices from personal computers to enterprise storage systems. It has an auto mode which does everything but you can tailor it to your needs.
Once you start talking about benchmarking an encfs, these parameters dont particularly apply to your filesystem any more, the filesystem is just an interface into something else that eventually backs onto a filesystem that backs onto a drive.
I think it would be helpful to understand what exactly you're trying to measure, because there are two factors in play here - the raw disk IO speed, which you can test by timing various DD commands (can give examples if this is what you want) /without/ encfs, or the process will be CPU bounded by the encryption and you're trying to test the relative throughput of the encryption algorithm. In which case the parameters for queue depth etc aren't particularly relevant.
This link seems to provide a good guide to disk speed testing using timed DD commands including the necessary coverage about 'defeating buffers/cache' and so forth. Likely this will provide the information you need. Decide which you're more interested in tho, disk performance or encryption performance, one of the two will be the bottleneck, and tuning the non-bottleneck isn't going to benefit anything.
in that case i suggest testing the speed of the software with the official crystal disk mark software that is also recommended by sandisk to see the actuall speed of the card. If then the write speed is under 10mb then of course you can ask for a replacement if not then the card seems to work normally
I filled in the online RMA request, was asked to show a screenshot of the test result from Crystal Mark, and subsequently RMA was authorised. The slow micro sd card is on its way back for replecement now.
Why not you use crystal disk mark and test whether are you having Sata 3 speed? If it is indeed sata 3, you should be getting 400MB/s to 500MB/s. Someone did mentioned Netac SSD is capable of doing much higher speed but when operating under Sata 2, the speed will never hit above 300MB/s
The sequential R/W speeds are double from the Gen2 to the Gen3/Auto settings. The Random R/W speeds are not really affected by the setting. Also, there is not much difference between the Gen3 and Auto settings.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents. This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links has no substantive legal effect.
These markup elements allow the user to see how the document follows the Document Drafting Handbook that agencies use to create their documents. These can be useful for better understanding how a document is structured but are not part of the published document itself.
d3342ee215