Blackmagic disk speed test of macbook pro 2012 256 ssd

#Blackmagic disk speed test of macbook pro 2012 256 ssd install#
#Blackmagic disk speed test of macbook pro 2012 256 ssd mac#

That's quite the difference! How about reading and writing in one go? $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test count=1 bs=409600000Д¤09600000 bytes transferred in 0.118812 secs (3,447,463,219 bytes/sec)Д¬onclusion: do not use dd to measure disk performance. 4096 blocks (mind the count to get the same number of bytes): $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test count=800000Д¤09600000 bytes transferred in 2.173086 secs (188,487,708 bytes/sec) So let's compare the default 512 byte blocks vs. On the shell, you can determine your SSD's block size via diskutil info /, e.g.: $ diskutil info / | grep Block

#Blackmagic disk speed test of macbook pro 2012 256 ssd install#

Now go ahead and download the install package. From the download list, select the latest Desktop Video release (in the screen capture above, itвЂ™s 11.6). head over to the Blackmagic support page for capture and playback devices here. It's using a block size of 512 bytes by default, which on an SSD is far from optimal. Here are the steps you need to install it. And, for kicks, a Samsung Extreme Thunderbolt: 0.5GB/s write, 0.4GB/s read.Дd is a very bad tool to measure disk performance.external usb3 sandisk 2tb relatively empty: 0.4GB/s, read 0.4GB/s.ItвЂ™ll take you through the test, and your final result will be displayed.

#Blackmagic disk speed test of macbook pro 2012 256 ssd mac#

mac mini 256gb internal relatively full: write 1.5GB/s, read 0.75GB/s. To perform the test, simply open Cinebench and click Run next to the OpenGL test in the top-lefthand corner of the app.

Per darkdust's answer below, here are versions with 4096 block size: I also checked whether /dev/zero has special tricks (through comparison with /dev/random), but the modest deterioration on all drives suggests that my dd really does write zeros to ssd. PS: I compared this to performance on an external USB3 sandisk SSD 2TB, where I get about twice the write performance and about half the read performance.

Is this the number I should be expecting? (I know that there is overhead I believe on an SSD, file fragmentation is no longer the issue it once used to be, however.)

I am not interested in synthetic raw disk performance, but in performance on the APFS file system. It is not a fresh disk-I now have only about 30GB remaining.