80 mb/s reads are average for a laptop HD. It may just be that it's that slow.
The http://openbenchmarking.org/opc/1207...4#system_table page lists some of the things, and the model is Aspire 5740. Note that it's a dualcode CPU with hyperthreading, not a quadcore.
Here's what the hdparm said:
Incidentally, after running the first set of PTS benchmarks and then running the SMART extended test, the biggest offender in slowness - the sound menu coming up - has gotten to be a bit quicker about it... so I ran benchmarks again last night, however the new results are inconclusive: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...AR-1207015AR38Code:/dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 5282 MB in 2.00 seconds = 2643.53 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 242 MB in 3.00 seconds = 80.59 MB/sec
80 mb/s reads are average for a laptop HD. It may just be that it's that slow.
If you want ssd speed just buy one. It's just that simple.
Well time to read dmesg. Look at
http://openbenchmarking.org/system/1...e-defrag/dmesg
That shows lots of ext4 errors, maybe the hd is already bad. Also i would never install a 32 bit os on a new system. Certainly i would use 64 bit and boot it preferred via UEFI. Also you can try a new kernel.
Code:wget -qO- http://kanotix.com/files/fix/mainline/install-3.5.sh|sudo sh
Last edited by Kano; 07-11-2012 at 05:54 AM.
Hm... would installing this kernel certainly fix the ext4 errors and not break the normal kernel updates Ubuntu does?
I went with 32bit a while ago because of Flash issues - this is a system for a common user, and they didn't need 64bit of practically speaking, 32bit offered the better experience. It's changed since, but the system was just upgraded instead of being reinstalled.
That kernel is much newer than the ubuntu default. So standard ubuntu kernels will never be default.
Alright - how would that address the problem however?
(I'd just like to understand what is happening and if this is necessary)
Ah, right. You get to choose which one to load at start. I'll try that then.