Single 32GB OCZ Core SSD NTFS 4K, 16K, 32K, 64K
Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit

Swapped over to Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit for some single non-OS 32GB OCZ Core SSD tests of different NTFS cluster sizes between 4K, 16K, 32K and 64K.

• E8600 Q820A599 **0464
• CPU Cooling: Dtek Fuzion Rad Tower Box
• Gigabyte GA-EP45 Extreme rev 1.0 F6k bios
• 512MB Inno3D 8800GT OC Edition @700/1732/2000
• 2x1GB Team PC2-10400 C6 dual channel kit
• Memory cooling: 120x25mm Thermaltake 81cfm fan
• 320GB Seagate 7200.10 SATAII OS disk
• 4x 32GB OCZ Core SSD 2.5" solid state disks single disk mode
• Pioneer 216 DVD-RW
• 1200W Silverstone OP1200
• Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit - vLite + post SP1 hotfix/updates

Notes:

• Remember my results are on Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit with latest hotfix/updates integrated via vLite
• I setup OCZ SSD Core as non-OS disks as i wanted to try write testings but Everest Ultimate 4.50.1494 beta write tests throws an error so below only read test suite tested. I previously set these OCZ SSD Core disks to raid mode on ICH10R and it seems I forgot to reset them to non-raid via Intel Storage Manager so not sure if that was the problem. Will retest later.
• Seems for this motherboard + Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit, 4k NTFS clusters was best for OCZ SSD Cores compared to 16K, 32K, 64K NTFS cluster size.

Settings:

• Indexing disabled
• Superfetch enabled
• System Restore disabled
• Enabled advance performance

ATTO Bench v2.34

4K default cluster on Vista Ultimate SP1 64bit had an even faster result than my Windows XP Pro SP2 Atto Bench but the 16K-64K Vista results were similar to my Windows XP Pro SP2.

320GB Seagate 7200.10 OS disk


OCZ SSD Core NTFS 4K vs 16K cluster


OCZ SSD Core NTFS 32K vs 64K cluster

HDTune 2.55

4K vs 16K (right)


32K vs 64K (right)

Everest Ultimate 4.50.1494 Beta

Read suite tests
4K cluster had highest random read (132.1MB/s), while 16K cluster clearly had a higher buffered read (163.9MB/s). 16K, 32K, 64K all had slight faster Average read access of 0.42ns versus 4K at 0.43ns.

4K followed by 16K (left) and 32K followed by 64K (right)

PCmark05 HDD Test

16K cluster just slightly won our due to higher XP Startup speed, followed by 32K, 64K and then 4K cluster although they're fairly close when you look at the break down individual HDD test suite sub tests.

320GB Seagate 7200.10 OS


4K vs 16K NTFS cluster


32K vs 64K NTFS cluster