Does Your SSD's File System Affect Performance?

Benchmark Results: PCMark 7

Synthetic benchmarks that spit out performance numbers for contrived workloads do not necessarily reflect real-life performance. To represent more realistic scenarios, we turn to PCMark 7. While PCMark 7 isn’t exactly a real-world suite, it is trace-based and does in fact reflect typical performance you would see in everyday operation.

Importing pictures to Windows Photo gallery means writing quite a bit of data. Appropriately, FAT32 isn’t the best foundation for this workload.

The overall score makes it clear that the differences in the real-world is much smaller than some of the more synthetic measures might suggest, regardless of whether you're comparing file systems or SSD architectures. However, FAT32 really is a bad choice on the Samsung 830, as seen in this example.

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
5 comments
    Your comment
  • jamesedgeuk2000
    Could you not have benchmarked HPS too by doing the tests with a Mac setup to duel boot OSX and Windows 7? (thus letting the 7 install see the HPS file system)
    0
  • djamorpheus
    What about linux filesystems?
    0
  • audiovoodoo
    No mention of cluster size impact on performance?
    0
  • audiovoodoo
    What are you talking about?
    0
  • Anonymous
    Question is does the FAT32 partition was aligned? Data on FAT32 starts straight after two FAT tables (their size depends on amount of clusters). So even if volume for FAT32 partition is aligned after creating such partition the FAT32 clusters may not be aligned to SSD physical sectors.

    http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/151798-does-fat32-align-its-clusters/
    0