ie8 fix
madison

Windows 7 and SSDs: just how fast are they?

By | January 23, 2011, 5:50pm PST

Does a solid-state drive make a difference in the performance of Windows 7?

In a word: Yes.

Conventional hard disks are typically the biggest bottleneck in any computing environment. If you can speed up disk activity, especially reads, the effects on system startup and application launch times can be breathtaking.

This technology is still new and expensive, and many of the kinks are still being worked out. I’ve been using SSD-equipped PCs with Windows 7 since October 2009, and I now have two laptops and one desktop PC that are fitted with these superfast drives. Over the holidays, I set out to fine-tune the storage configuration in all three systems and was able to increase overall system performance dramatically. In a follow-up post, I’ll explain exactly what you need to know to squeeze maximum performance out of an SSD.


Don’t miss the rest of this series.

Part 2: Windows 7 and SSDs: Setup secrets and tune-up tweaks

Part 3: Windows 7 and SSDs: Cutting your system drive down to size


But first, how much of a difference does an SSD make? I have an ideal platform to test: a new Dell XPS desktop system with an i7-920 CPU, 16GB of RAM, and two disks, a conventional 7200RPM Seagate 1TB hard disk drive (one of the fastest desktop models in its class) and a 60GB OCZ Vertex2 SSD. I’ve installed Windows 7 on each drive and configured a dual-boot menu.

I’ve been switching between the two systems for roughly a month. Today I went through the performance logs for both Windows installations and averaged the results for the last 15 starts for each setup. (If you want to see these results for your system, follow the instructions I published in this 2007 post—the event log format for Windows 7 is the same as it was for Vista.)

Measurement

SSD

HDD

Main-path boot time (sec)

9.1

24.1

Total boot time (sec)

30.3

65.7

That’s a 62% improvement in the time it takes for the system to get to the Windows desktop and a 54% improvement in the total boot time, which includes drivers and processes that are loaded with low-priority I/O. (The latter value includes third-party programs that are configured to run at startup.)

There’s also some interesting data in the Windows System Assessment Tool (WinSAT) logs, which contain the detailed benchmarks that make up the Windows Experience Index. On the Sequential Read test, the SSD wins going away, recording a throughput of 249.76 MB/sec, compared to 105.63 MB/sec for the conventional hard disk. The WinSAT benchmark also calculates a mysterious and undocumented Overall Responsiveness index, where the SSD in this system clocks a blistering score of 20.02, compared to 86.17 for the hard disk.

And my personal experience bears out those benchmarks. Startup times are startlingly fast, and I’m still practically giddy when I click an app and watch it spring to life in a second or less. The feeling of fast is practically visceral.

So, slap an SSD into a PC, fasten your seat bet, and prepare for the whoosh. Right?

Not so fast.

As I learned from more than a year’s hands-on experience, it takes cooperation from hardware manufacturers to get the most from an SSD. In the next part of this series, I explain where things can go wrong and how to set them right. See Windows 7 and SSDs: Setup secrets and tune-up tweaks, for the details.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books written prior to fall 2011 have been distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press. As of November 2011, Ed is a partner in the independent publishing company Fair Trade Digital Exchange, which exclusively publishes his books.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMware. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
200
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: IDC: Public IT cloud revenue to surge
drumandyou 28th Feb
Whether you power be attracted beside ancillary assessments regarding http://las-vilis.com/roulette/ online roulette , to facilitate http://las-vilis.com/ casino online canister back you in abundance of http://las-vilis.com/videoslot/ online slots
0 Votes
+ -
Good findings Ed. That makes sense.
performance for Window 7. Very embarrassing for MS . . . .
0 Votes
+ -
You do realize...
wolf_z 24th Jan 2011
@DonnieBoy

...That's a cold boot, right?

Running Vista I haven't done a cold boot in nearly six months, I just use the sleep mode and let it wake up. Boot time is about 3 seconds... happy

Or did you just want to bash something?
Nice to be able to resume applications right where you left off. So, the ability to do that with Windows too, does do a lot to negate the slow boot times.

But, the slow boot times do indicate problems with bloat.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@DonnieBoy

And 30 seconds for a full boot including a handful of apps configured to run at startup.

That's "terrible"?

Geez.
important. That is terrible and indicates some major bloat. Getting it down to 33 seconds for an SSD helps, but, . . .

Compare this to Chrome, where the only big disadvantage is not being able to run Legacy Win32 applications.
@DonnieBoy,
If you can't run any apps in ChromeOS like iTunes, Office, ect, then what good is lightning fast boot times?
Its like a TV without a signal: what good is it that my TV boots in 5 seconds, if I can't watch anything?
0 Votes
+ -
Very embarrasing for you
Cylon Centurion 24th Jan 2011
@DonnieBoy

Considering they have no control over what runs at startup. You can subtract a good 30 seconds from boot with no programs configured to run. My netbook can cold boot in 15 seconds flat.

Thank you for playing.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Windows 7 and SSDs: just how fast are they?
ItsTheBottomLine 24th Jan 2011
@DonnieBoy My Kubuntu and my Windows 7 machine are about the same FROM A COLD BOOT. Windows 7 is about 5 seconds longer...so I guess based on your comment above would be embarrassing for Ubuntu as well.
0 Votes
+ -
@DonnieBoy

"Compare this to Chrome, where the only big disadvantage is not being able to run Legacy Win32 applications. "

Well, that's the problem, isn't it? People want to run legacy applications.

I'm pretty sure if Microsoft didn't support legacy apps and devices, Windows would boot much faster.

. . . and I'll agree with the others saying that I just let my computer sleep, I rarely go through a cold boot.

Windows is certainly stable enough these days to stay running for a long time. The days of needing to reboot every day are long gone.
0 Votes
+ -
@DonnieBoy
My Xbox boots in five seconds flat and shuts down even faster and look what you can do with that. Go! Microsoft! happy
0 Votes
+ -
@DonnieBoy
Oh, and my winphone is instant on and off and man can you go crazy doing things on that beast. Go! Microsoft! happy
0 Votes
+ -
DB, you are embarrassing for yourself. Still playing "my OS is better than yours" after all of these years. Really it's been your life's work, which is quickly slipping away under your never ending monotone boring as hell ABM statements.
That's really all you have in life, isn't it.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Windows 7 and SSDs: just how fast are they?
x I'm tc Updated - 24th Jan 2011
@DonnieBoy

30 seconds is embarrassing?!?

I'd call that essentially close to *zero*, since Win7 *never* crashes and thus I *never* reboot except to install patches like *once a week*.

But you're a known moron, so whatev's.
0 Votes
+ -
@DonnieBoy : Trying to figure out why someone who uses Linux is reading this column?
0 Votes
+ -
Message has been deleted.
ahh so Updated - 25th Jan 2011
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Windows 7 and SSDs: just how fast are they?
i2fun@... Updated - 25th Jan 2011
@DonnieBoy That's terrible?!? .....you got to be kidding me!!! I am normally the last one to be amazed by MS, DonnieBoy. I'm not even close to being a Microsoft fanboy, like you are a Linux, Google Android/Apple fanboy. I do love Linux, but not it's boot up times. I am not so ignorant and naive as to dismiss less than 10sec for full Operating System boot up alone. Can Apple OS-X do that on an HDD? NO!!! ...and they don't support SSD's yet!

The matter of some 20 seconds more for network logon, anti-virus, chat program, 3rd party firewall, anti-malware with some other 3rd party processes booting is indeed honorable. Just admit it....... the only reason you're not amazed, is because you can't allow MS to overshadow your over zealous allegiance to Apple and it's now fallen leader Steven Jobs. Who is as good as down for the count. That stark Reality hasn't settle in yet, has it? You expect him to be miraculously resurrected some way some how. But this time it is not to be. Just let the near dead, old tired con artist quietly retire... please. As it is, he's a walking corpse, trying to figure out how to take all that cash with him, when he finally kicks the bucket. He should have invested it in America. Do you realize that Microsoft is one of the few American Corporations with the majority it's earnings still going into American's pockets? Where do think all the wealth in Apple is going? In fewer than 5% of their total US Citizen employee payrolls in America.

The rest is going into foreign pockets and a few elite people in the corporation's administration. They are one of the most un-American corporations in America today on taxes alone and..... you are one of the dumb arses supporting them for that!!!

btw.... Ubuntu? Linux??? ....please don't embarrass yourself and us other Linux users by challenging MS Windows 7 to a quickest boot up contest or even Apple against Linux. My Linux install boot ups have always been inferior to both Windows and OS-X. And so much of my great programs and hardware won't begin to run on OS-X. Namely my newest fastest graphics cards and brand new BluRay writer!
0 Votes
+ -
@DonnieBoy : coldbooting with in 30 sec ...why is it embarassing for MS exactly? why does it have to be embarassing for anyone? i see. u are one of those ppl who have to bash MS at any given chance! Win 7 is very good, get over yourself! i use ubuntu (10.10 desktop release) too. it doesn't boot that quicker & it doesn't have any of my favorite apps
0 Votes
+ -
@DonnieBoy, why is someone's specific hardware an embarrassment for MS? My desktop with windows 7 boots on my computer from the words "starting windows" to desktop in 9 seconds. That's pretty quick, and typically their main competitor, like an imac etc, tends to boot more slowly (15 to 20 secs) because their hardware is typically not high end but typical mid stream mobile-ish. My i7 based computer was only about $700. So again, windows 7 coming up that quickly is not an embarrassment that I can see.
0 Votes
+ -
@Ed Bott
It is terrible. I am running a bunch of servers (think LAMP, file and print servers) and I still get a better boot time on a regular HD than the 30sec you get. Oh, and your system has slightly better hardware than mine too. That being said, it is not the place for this sort of posts DonnieBoy.
0 Votes
+ -
@kirovs@...
Check out Fusion-io, Friend of mine, Mike Shapiro, started working there a while back. Looks like they have the super fast SSD Disk system for servers you are looking for. Concentrated on server disk subsystem speed. If your a Mac fanboy you may also like the fact that the Woz is the chief engineer. The tech looks really cool and speeds are out of this world, worth a glance anyway and if you do want to check it out give my buddy a call he can fill you in.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Are we measuring the same thing?
Ed Bott Updated - 24th Jan 2011
@kirovs@...

Please look at event viewer and give me the average of your last 15 starts for Main-Path Boot Time. Otherwise I have no idea what you're measuring.
0 Votes
+ -
@kirovs@... Supposing one OS boots in 65 seconds and another boots in three seconds. Assuming you actually do a cold boot every day (not sure why you would want to but ok). Does the 62 seconds saved on an operation done once per day really make any difference in the larger scheme of things? It doesn't to me. I'd turn it on and by the time I get back with my first cup of coffee, its on. I don't really care what it was doing in the mean time.
0 Votes
+ -
And another thing....
cornpie 24th Jan 2011
@kirovs@... Any server I've ever worked with takes a lot longer than 30 seconds just to do things like loading the bios for SCSI/RAID cards etc. The time needed to load the OS is usually trivial by comparison. I'm with Ed here. Perhaps you could clarify just what it is you are measuring?
0 Votes
+ -
@blittrell
You're steering the guy into a hornet's nest of speculation. Here's a link that explains that they have not as yet been able to "Boot Up" an operating system running on a Fusion-io PCI-E add on card yet:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fusioinio-iodrive-flash,2140.html
0 Votes
+ -
@kirovs@... Those are SERVERS and not desktops pcs! Server hardware is designed much different than desktops. I run a server as my desktop with 5x 10k rpm SCSI HDDs with 2x 3GHz Xeons Dual-cores and I'm impressed.
0 Votes
+ -
@kirovs@... your servers will likely be fitted with server grade HDD's with MUCH bigger caches and traditional desktop HDD's and thus will boot much faster than a traditional desktop PC.
0 Votes
+ -
Whether you power be attracted beside ancillary assessments regarding http://las-vilis.com/roulette/ online roulette , to facilitate http://las-vilis.com/ casino online canister back you in abundance of http://las-vilis.com/videoslot/ online slots
0 Votes
+ -
Meanwhile, back in the real world...
JimboNobody Updated - 24th Jan 2011
Ed,

This is great information for next decade (assuming we're out of the depression by then). But no way is my company going to spring for a i7, much less SSD. To mention nothing of my efforts to eke out a few more years on my Dell Dimension 4600 with WinXP SP3 at home. Don't lose touch with reality just because you have easy access to the latest and best products.
0 Votes
+ -
@JimboNobody

I wish you luck in these difficult times, but you have to be rational. Ed has these at home in his consumer box. If your business can't keep up, be looking to go work for one that can. You can only fall so far behind before you're out of business for good.
0 Votes
+ -
I wish you luck too
Cylon Centurion 24th Jan 2011
@JimboNobody

But Windows XP is a dead horse. It's a topic that has been covered from top to bottom and then some. Certainly, if people have the money for an SSD, they're not running XP on it that's for sure.
0 Votes
+ -
@JimboNobody
Oh cry me a river. Whiner.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
I pay for them myself
Ed Bott 24th Jan 2011
@JimboNobody

I don't have "easy access to the latest and greatest products." I buy them, out of my own pocket, and they cost a helluva lot less than you must think. The particular i7-920 system I'm benchmarking here cost me $624.60, including tax and shipping. It came with 4GB RAM, which I upgraded. The SSD was $120.

Those are not budget-busting prices.
0 Votes
+ -
@JimboNobody Next decade? We have historically gone into recession every 7 to 9 years.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Windows 7 and SSDs: just how fast are they?
ty_pippen@... Updated - 24th Jan 2011
Clean install vs. reconfiguring Windows are also major concerns for me, but performance is an issue. Since SSDs are much smaller than HDDs, I would have to keep the My Docs folder and the Program Files folders on the existing HDD. Not having an SSD, I am not sure if they come with utilities to simply move the Windows folders to the SSD and make it the startup drive, or if it takes a ton of work to do so. I would love to see how SSD manufacturers are simplifying that part of the process.

If not, it could take a week to re-install all software, not to mention saying a prayer when it comes to the Win 7 Activation.
0 Votes
+ -
@ty_pippen@...

The process is no different than when you're cheap 3.5" fails and you need to copy our data over to the new drive. The changes are all at the firmware level, so if you have software to move the partitions and filesystem, like dd or Norton's ghost, then you're good to go. If you haven't found such tools yet, well, they're lack hasn't seemed to hurt the HDD market at all.
0 Votes
+ -
@ty_pippen@... If you have Windows 7 then you can make a backup of the C partition and store it on another drive or external. Then all you have to do is put in the SSD and restore from backup. I have done it and it takes about 40 min to have everything back up and running (including all your installed programs). Windows 7 backup has improved 100 fold over XP
0 Votes
+ -
@Rama.NET
Agree, we can argue the boot times forever. What really counts is SSD is quiet, fast and NO defrag! According to WIN7 performance to my system went from 5.8 to 7.0 on just the SSD alone.
0 Votes
+ -
Boot times are not that critical as I normally hibernate (not sleep).
Having said that, my boot times for my Gigabyte T1028X convertible netbook with a Crucial 64 GB SSD :

Ubuntu 10.10 Unity : Cold start to usage : 18 secs
Shutdown: 5 secs
Win 7 to usage: 35 secs; Shutdown : 12 secs

Regards,
ScottyJavea
0 Votes
+ -
@ScottyJavea - interesting. My Sony Vaio Z Series has 2 x 128GB SSD's configured in a RAID 0 stripe and boots/shuts down U10.10 in 18s/5s and Win7x64 in 17s/5s.

There is almost nothing to separate the OS boot times any more.

I know that MS are investing a TON of engineering for Win8 to signficantly alter how Windows is packaged and how it boots, opens apps, sleeps, shuts down, etc. It'll be interesting to see what changes are made to the filesystem to accomodate their goals.
0 Votes
+ -
Omg i want all!! rolex gmt master replica
0 Votes
+ -
Funny
Richard Flude 23rd Jan 2011
A i7-920 CPU taking over a minute to boot. Now that's funny;-)
0 Votes
+ -
@Richard Flude

If you're needs are few, you don't really need modern apps or compatibility with clients and you don't play games, you too can boot the CPU faster - simply because Linux is doing less. This of course is about your only activity besides running benchmarks, so have fun wink

However, this is all just a furphy as my desktop system returns from sleep in a few seconds. I can live with a 50 sec boot once every few days if it means I actually have a computer to do things rather than a toy or a hobby.
0 Votes
+ -
@tonymcs@... Eh? No, I don't play games on my computer. That's what consoles are for. Much better suited for the task, especially with the newer motion sensing controls that are coming out lately. So tell me, where is the modern video editing ap for Windows that doesn't cost a great deal of money and is compatible with nearly every codec in existence-mind you it has to also be able to render multiple codecs, as well-not just .wmv.

Incidentally, Windows does not support the codec for my video-a Sanyo CG20(it uses h.264) unless you use the Windows Live Movie Maker. I had a Vivitar before that that produced AVI files that could only be opened by the Vivitar software, and could not be edited with WMM. Guess which 'non modern' OS opens both with no problem?

Where is the photo organiser that has enough features to allow you reasonably decent photo editing options-the ones that most people are likely to use in the main; offers batch processing for colour correction, watermarking, etc, and allows you to write flash galleries, html photo galleries, or upload to flickr and facebook all within the same programme?

Can you manage an iPod without iTunes? I can. Not only that, the programmes I use are a great deal faster. Can you take your Windows installation and plug it into another computer so you can use your desktop and applications anywhere? No you can't, because Windows doesn't allow it.

I'm a freelance photographer. I need something that both works and is dead cheap. I can't afford the price of another computer for Photoshop. I need to be able to turn around a weekend show shoot of up to 2000 photos within two days, and I've been doing that for years. With Linux. In fact, the only thing I need Windows for is to update my GPS and iOS on my iPod touch.

And I don't have to live with a 50 second boot time. I have an Intel 80GB SSD. It's 10 seconds from cold iron to login. Not that I have to reboot all that often anyway, since the only time that's required is if the kernel updates. The system can update other programmes or I can install something new, and it's immediately available.

Let me know when Windows does that.
0 Votes
+ -
in reference to "let me know when Linux can do that" but we'd be here all day listing the things Linux can't do.

So what was your point?
0 Votes
+ -
Donnie
Cylon Centurion Updated - 24th Jan 2011
This post isn't about "Legacy applications". They have nothing to do with start times.

This post is about Windows 7 and Solid State Drives. Which means that it targets Windows 7 users - obviously not you.
is pointless for people that no longer run Legacy Win32. So, just to run Legacy Win32, you get a bloated OS, and, as Ed noted here, very long boot times.
do, justifying the long boot times. But, as it turns out, the "more" that you can do is just running legacy Win32 applications, which, is on the way out anyway. Again, if you do not run legacy Win32 applications, Windows (and the long boot times) is somewhat pointless.
0 Votes
+ -
@tonymcs@...
You are delusional dear boy. It is always refreshing and funny when Win zealots are trying to represent Linux as something backwards and old.
Tell it to, hmm, you know- NASA, Hollywood and the top 500 supercomputers in the world (wait there are 5 running Windows as well).
But live in your dream world, this is OK.
0 Votes
+ -
Your arguement is still invalid.
Cylon Centurion 24th Jan 2011
At what point are legacy applications even running on Windows 7? Thank you! Come again! Your bridge misses you.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix