Image: Microsoft

Windows 10 users who have decided to hold off on upgrading to the latest version of Microsoft’s hugely popular OS have probably made the right decision, as the problems for Windows 11 appear to be piling up.

The latest relates to SSD performance; some users on the web are reporting that their NVMe drives are operating worse on Windows 11. More specifically, the OS seems to be crippling either the IOPS or read/write performance of various drives such as Samsung’s 970 EVO Plus and WD SN520.

From Mussels84, showing reduced writes on Windows 11 vs. Windows 10:

From MahtiDruidi, who experienced crippled 4K write speeds:

From MJ_JasonM, highlighting reduced performance in the RND 4K Q32 T16 test:

A Microsoft employee had confirmed that the company would be looking into the problem a few months ago. An update released in November (KB5007262) includes a supposed fix for SSD performance, but users still seem to be experiencing degraded speeds.

“Addresses an issue that affects the performance of all disks (NVMe, SSD, hardisk) on Windows 11 by performing unnecessary actions each time a write operation occurs,” Microsoft wrote. “This issue occurs only when the NTFS USN journal is enabled. Note, the USN journal is always enabled on the C: disk.”

Source: r/Windows11 (via NeoWin)

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

Join the Conversation

42 Comments

  1. Seems like there are more and more issues with Win 11. Maybe it will eventually progress to something stable and worthwhile. Till then, Win 10 and Linux in this house.

  2. [QUOTE=”Dogsofjune, post: 44891, member: 168″]
    Seems like there are more and more issues with Win 11. Maybe it will eventually progress to something stable and worthwhile. Till then, Win 10 and Linux in this house.
    [/QUOTE]

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of Microsofts design decisions with Windows 11, but it’s generally a good idea to delay ALL OS upgrades until the kinks are worked out.

    Operating systems are generally one area where you really don’t want to be “first”

  3. [QUOTE=”Zarathustra, post: 44900, member: 203″]
    Operating systems are generally one area where you really don’t want to be “first”
    [/QUOTE]
    True but someone needs to use it to get rid of the kinks they overlooked.

    Also I’m not that versed in SSD performance but I find it strange that some of the tests in win10 they are showing higher write speads then reads which seems atypical as all SSD’s to my knowledge have faster reads then writes but feel free to enlighten me on the subject.

  4. [QUOTE=”Zarathustra, post: 44900, member: 203″]
    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of Microsofts design decisions with Windows 11, but it’s generally a good idea to delay ALL OS upgrades until the kinks are worked out.

    Operating systems are generally one area where you really don’t want to be “first”
    [/QUOTE]
    I don’t have a problem with being first to try out a new OS. Haven’t had any issues with Windows 11 and I’ve been using it since it opened up on the insider program. I change out hardware and cases quite often and have had no hiccups. Even switched to Alder Lake without doing a fresh install. As far as any SSD performance hits, I haven’t experienced any that are noticeable.

  5. I used windows 7 as my main OS since it was in beta. Even in that state it was way better than Vista.

    Really didn’t use win 8/8.1 much and quickly jumped to windows 10. Since none of my PC is Windows 11 ready, I’m not making the switch.

  6. I upgraded almost immediately from XP>Vista>7>8>8.1>10 to get the APIs for gaming. Windows 11 has no draw for me and I’ve also let the staff at my other job know that I’ve no plans to upgrade to it until at least next summer. I know some people who’ve had great experiences with it but it will take time for me to trust it after what I am seeing now and have already experienced with 10.

    Reading this last week didn’t exactly bolster confidence from me either.
    [URL]https://www.tweaktown.com/news/83116/windows-11-adoption-is-pathetic-less-than-1-have-upgraded/index.html[/URL]

  7. So, I have no idea if my SSD is slowed down or not. I have my OS installed on a NVMe drive, and I have a second SATA SSD in the system. In typical real use (not video file editing or broad parallel database access or anything crazy – just typical gaming and light office stuff) – I can’t tell the difference between the two if I’m honest.

    I also have a spinner in the system – you can definitely tell if something is on the spinner. But between the NVMe and SATA drives — if something takes 0.03 vs 0.01, I haven’t really been able to tell – at least until you get a whole lot of those types of transactions happening serially or something, which isn’t very often.

    That said, no excuse for Win11. Just saying there isn’t much out there that really leverages the speed NVMe is bringing to the table.

  8. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 44908, member: 96″]
    So, I have no idea if my SSD is slowed down or not
    [/QUOTE]
    For S&G I ran CrystalDisk this morning just to see. TL;DR is I didn’t really see anything.

    Here’s what [URL=’https://www.servethehome.com/sabrent-rocket-nvme-4-0-pcie-gen4-x4-m-2-ssd-1tb/3/’]a random Google search benchmark site[/URL] saw on my drive:

    [IMG]https://www.servethehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Sabrent-Rocket-4-1TB-CrystalDiskMark-7.jpg[/IMG]

    With a newer version of Crystal I set the testing parameters to match up, but no idea if the internals are running the same so I can’t claim this is strictly apples-to-apples, and I’m too lazy to go hunting for an older version, but here’s what I got on my drive

    [ATTACH type=”full” alt=”NMVE no Cache with Settings.png”]1363[/ATTACH]

    Little bit better on writes, but not to far off the mark really.

    Just for comparison, I usually run PrimoCache read cache (see[URL=’https://forums.thefpsreview.com/threads/hdd-ssd-caching-still-a-thing.5348′] thread here[/URL] where I got started – I extended the cache to RAM cache the SSDs as well as the HDD) here’s the same test run with PrimoCache RAM caching turned on. I dunno if real-world it helps more than standard pre-fetch, but it definitely affects these benchmarks.

    [ATTACH type=”full” alt=”NMVE w Cache with Settings.png”]1364[/ATTACH]

  9. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 44910, member: 96″]
    For S&G I ran CrystalDisk this morning just to see. TL;DR is I didn’t really see anything.

    Here’s what [URL=’https://www.servethehome.com/sabrent-rocket-nvme-4-0-pcie-gen4-x4-m-2-ssd-1tb/3/’]a random Google search benchmark site[/URL] saw on my drive:

    [IMG]https://www.servethehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Sabrent-Rocket-4-1TB-CrystalDiskMark-7.jpg[/IMG]

    With a newer version of Crystal I set the testing parameters to match up, but no idea if the internals are running the same so I can’t claim this is strictly apples-to-apples, and I’m too lazy to go hunting for an older version, but here’s what I got on my drive

    [ATTACH type=”full” alt=”NMVE no Cache with Settings.png”]1363[/ATTACH]

    Little bit better on writes, but not to far off the mark really.

    Just for comparison, I usually run PrimoCache read cache (see[URL=’https://forums.thefpsreview.com/threads/hdd-ssd-caching-still-a-thing.5348′] thread here[/URL] where I got started – I extended the cache to RAM cache the SSDs as well as the HDD) here’s the same test run with PrimoCache RAM caching turned on. I dunno if real-world it helps more than standard pre-fetch, but it definitely affects these benchmarks.

    [ATTACH type=”full” alt=”NMVE w Cache with Settings.png”]1364[/ATTACH]
    [/QUOTE]
    Thanks for the share. Yeah, so far what I’ve heard has been inconsistent and I do wonder if there other factors at play we’re not hearing about. I remember a few weeks back there was a story about BT Xbox controllers causing issues on PC and I use one with my laptop and have never had issues except for when the batteries die. Regardless though, I’m going to hold off a bit before upgrading anything. I just don’t want more driver headaches. I’ve had enough in the last 3-5 years.

  10. I was going to investigate it too, but, I don’t have Win 11.

    Always a bridesmaid, never the bride……

  11. Got a TPM module for one of my spare systems and performed an in-place upgrade. Working well enough so far, more or less amounts to a minor facelift IMO.

  12. [QUOTE=”LazyGamer, post: 44957, member: 1367″]
    Got a TPM module for one of my spare systems and performed an in-place upgrade. Working well enough so far, more or less amounts to a minor facelift IMO.
    [/QUOTE]
    Pretty much this – feels like any other major Win10 update where they screw with all the settings panels and random UI stuff for the sake of screwing with stuff.

    I can’t see anything significant at all.

    That said, I don’t recommend for or against it. If what you got works for you, there’s nothing to gain moving to Win11 right now, but I also don’t think it’s any worse than Win10 with it’s random “major update” changes either.

    *edit* – I lied, there was one feature I did notice, but it’s pretty minor. Win11 supports [URL=’https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/use-auto-hdr-for-better-gaming-in-windows-0cce8402-3de5-4512-a742-e027ca7aa79c’]Auto HDR[/URL], and I do have a couple of games that support it. It’s nice, but hardly worth an entire OS upgrade for. The new Start is utterly useless. I had high hopes for Widgets, but they are completely and utterly retarded in Win11. Supposedly Win11 will also let you run apps from the Android store, but that feature isn’t quite ready for prime time (and even when it goes roll out – what really is on the Android store that I need to run on Windows?)

  13. [QUOTE=”Brent_Justice, post: 44954, member: 3″]
    There are no, read NO, advantages to moving to Windows 11 at this time. It offers nothing compelling or different or better to make the switch.
    [/QUOTE]
    Gee, I’ve heard the exact same argument since Win95 if memory serves me well, not that it ain’t true. 😀 :giggle:

    I’m not moving to windows 11 simply because my hardware does not support it and I’m not going to upgrade just for a new OS.

  14. Moving to a new OS/console/anything is more about looking forward.

    On release, it’s usually at or near parity with whatever preceded it. You can’t stray too far from the status quo, because you are still supporting a majority of people on the status quo.

    But the promise is, moving forward, the status quo gets dropped and all the new stuff starts coming out exclusive to the new platform.

    So you either get on board, or eventually get left behind.

  15. I was one of those people that jumped to Vista and 64 bit libraries back in the day. And I’ve moved to windows 11 from 10 and I even used and 8.0. 11 is fine if you don’t mind having to dig for the nitty gritty controls from windows 10 and 7 time frame. Many of them also don’t exist.

    I chose windows 11 insider version and have been ding well. Not missing anything really but also no huge gains either.

  16. I skipped Win Me, Windows Vista and Windows 8/8.1. I guess I will end up moving to Windows 11 eventually just not in the near future.

  17. I guess I haven’t skipped any since 3.0

    Me sucked. 8 sucked. Vista was maligned but I didn’t think it was ~that~ horrible, there was just a huge buildup because we had been on XP forever and it felt like a letdown. XP was great for the time – it finally made Windows stable, and 7 was it’s best successor.

    Seems like there have been 3 major generations of Windows… at least with respect to design philosophy. The original through 3.11, 95 through 7, and then 8 through today. 95 was the biggest jump, but it wasn’t a great release – something as benign as an improper shutdown corrupting Registry meant routine re-install among other issues. 8 was almost as big a jump as 95.

    10 had promise – it was supposed to be the XP of the 3rd generation of windows – something that finally brought stability to the design. But they could never seem to leave the design alone and kept changing the layout. I hated it for that.

    That said, throughout all of these iterations, Windows hasn’t really changed that much from the front face. An OS shouldn’t do much other than facilitate applications to run, and apart from that it should stay out of the way. The best releases in my opinion have been the ones that do that the best.

  18. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 44973, member: 96″]
    Me sucked. 8 sucked. Vista was maligned but I didn’t think it was ~that~ horrible, there was just a huge buildup because we had been on XP forever and it felt like a letdown. XP was great for the time – it finally made Windows stable, and 7 was it’s best successor.
    [/QUOTE]

    I went 95, 98, 2k, vista, 7 and then 10 for my main machine, vista was bad at launch, was better after the first big update and given that 7 was an updated vista it was fine.

    Seems I’m one of the few people that did not get XP as I was happy with 2k. I did use 8.1 on my laptop as it came preinstalled but have since upgraded it to 10, did not find anything wrong with 8.1.

    probably will go 11 if I get an alder lake setup.

  19. [QUOTE=”Denpepe, post: 44974, member: 284″]
    I went 95, 98, 2k, vista, 7 and then 10 for my main machine, vista was bad at launch, was better after the first big update and given that 7 was an updated vista it was fine.

    Seems I’m one of the few people that did not get XP as I was happy with 2k. I did use 8.1 on my laptop as it came preinstalled but have since upgraded it to 10, did not find anything wrong with 8.1.

    probably will go 11 if I get an alder lake setup.
    [/QUOTE]
    2K was a good, solid release. It was more marketed towards corporate use than home/mainstream use so a lot of people never saw it.

    8.1 fixed a lot that was troublesome with 8 – seems like they were really trying to push everyone to a touch interface, but it came at the expense of the UI rather than in addition to; which was pretty much how 8.1 “fixed” it.

  20. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 44975, member: 96″]
    seems like they were really trying to push everyone to a touch interface
    [/QUOTE]
    Yeah, I think they believed that touchscreens would takeover in every environment and hadn’t fully realized that the format just isn’t efficient in a lot of them still.

    What I hated the most with 10 was how you never knew when the UI would remove or move something in an update unless you really tracked the notes or news bites for one. I mean, sure you could always use the cmd prompt or type it into the search bar but it felt ridiculous that something like the control panel or device manager could move all over the place.

  21. I started with dos 6.2.2 never got into windows until windows 95 then I did them all. Amazing the power the command line still holds over the command line. Just look up the command takeown as an example with with pathd is crazy powerful.

  22. [QUOTE=”Grimlakin, post: 44983, member: 215″]
    Amazing the power the command line still holds over the command line
    [/QUOTE]
    Indeed!

    I got away from command line stuff on Windows, but Windows for me is more of a vehicle to play games, and when needed, run the occasional piece of software that won’t run anywhere else.

    That said, I’m in a linux CLI every day, and do quite a bit in the OS X terminal as well. For ~most~ things, once you know the environment, CLI is going to be faster. That said, I fully admit that GUI does tend to be more intuitive and easier to pick up with little to no instruction.

  23. [QUOTE=”Grimlakin, post: 44983, member: 215″]
    I started with dos 6.2.2
    [/QUOTE]
    Been so long I can’t even remember which version of MS-DOS I was using back in the day. I transitioned into Windows from my old Atari 400 which had been modded/upgraded enough(got in 1980) that it lasted into the late 80s and sometime back then my dad got me a Tandy 1000ex to ‘break me in’ with using Windows. At that point, I’d already been through several versions of Atari DOS and even gained a little familiarity with CP/M due to what they cloned from it. I used that Tandy into the early 90s and took a break from PCs in general and gaming and didn’t get back to it until a Pentium II was handed down to me which has 95 or 98 on it. Not long after I bought and completely rebuilt a P4 system with XP and that thing chugged along for almost ten years until I got a QUAD2CORE which came with Vista. That was my last pre-built, upgraded most parts on it too, and ever since have built my own and fixed other peoples, plus maintained my job. During these phases, I’ve had to deal with all the subsequent versions of Windows for one reason or another. I’m kind of taking a break with 11 since I’m simply just burned out on OS upgrades between MS/Apple/Android at this point.

    Edit: Just to add that I used Atari DOS 1.0 through 4.0

  24. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 44973, member: 96″]
    I guess I haven’t skipped any since 3.0

    Me sucked. 8 sucked. Vista was maligned but I didn’t think it was ~that~ horrible, there was just a huge buildup because we had been on XP forever and it felt like a letdown. XP was great for the time – it finally made Windows stable, and 7 was it’s best successor.

    Seems like there have been 3 major generations of Windows… at least with respect to design philosophy. The original through 3.11, 95 through 7, and then 8 through today. 95 was the biggest jump, but it wasn’t a great release – something as benign as an improper shutdown corrupting Registry meant routine re-install among other issues. 8 was almost as big a jump as 95.

    10 had promise – it was supposed to be the XP of the 3rd generation of windows – something that finally brought stability to the design. But they could never seem to leave the design alone and kept changing the layout. I hated it for that.

    That said, throughout all of these iterations, Windows hasn’t really changed that much from the front face. An OS shouldn’t do much other than facilitate applications to run, and apart from that it should stay out of the way. The best releases in my opinion have been the ones that do that the best.
    [/QUOTE]
    You left out windows 2000 which is IMO the most important OS as it cemented the future of windows with the NT kernel.

    Vista was bad, really really bad, but the worst part is that it probably came too early. Vista sucked in large part because it needed much more ram than the 512mb that it required. At the time 512 was about the most you could have in a PC although 1gb came out soon after.

    But even with 1gb+ Windows 7 feeled much faster and responsive. I recall upgrading dozens of vista PCs to win7 and the performance difference was noticeable.

    IMO win 8.1 was actually quite nice, we had several pcs at work with it. it’s just that windows 7 was as good or even better.

  25. [QUOTE=”Grimlakin, post: 44983, member: 215″]
    I started with dos 6.2.2 never got into windows until windows 95 then I did them all. Amazing the power the command line still holds over the command line. Just look up the command takeown as an example with with pathd is crazy powerful.
    [/QUOTE]
    I recall 6.2.2 being very popular back in the day, but that was not my first.

  26. [QUOTE=”Stoly, post: 44997, member: 1474″]
    You left out windows 2000 which is IMO the most important OS as it cemented the future of windows with the NT kernel.
    [/QUOTE]
    And after a service pack (or two?), could [I]game[/I]. That cemented the future of the NT branch amongst enthusiasts as well!

    [QUOTE=”Stoly, post: 44997, member: 1474″]
    Vista was bad, really really bad, but the worst part is that it probably came too early.
    [/QUOTE]
    As with Windows 98 to 95, XP to… Me?, and more recently 10 to 8 / 8.1, Vista was chock full of features and a very different underlying approach that just flat out broke many things, on top of all that just being plain slow for the first few service packs.

    Vista [I]also [/I]brought the first mainstream 64bit, that is, x86-64 and not IA-64, mainstream desktop Windows OS. Once patched to parity with Windows 7, there was little to differentiate between the two for average users.

    And I still lament the demise of gadgets as well as the sidebar. With ultrawide multi-monitor setups, sidebar apps would be useful today, most especially if Microsoft continued to evolve the API to make interfacing gadgets with more sources of information possible.

    [QUOTE=”Stoly, post: 44997, member: 1474″]
    But even with 1gb+ Windows 7 feeled much faster and responsive. I recall upgrading dozens of vista PCs to win7 and the performance difference was noticeable.
    [/QUOTE]
    Patch for patch, at least the last Vista patches next to the same patches for Windows 7, they should be near indistinguishable. A fresh install of a late-vintage Vista build wasn’t that bad IIRC, Microsoft just had to cut ties to the Vista name given the baggage it carried. I guess what I’m saying is that there’s no technical reason they introduced Windows 7, it was all marketing.

    [QUOTE=”Stoly, post: 44997, member: 1474″]
    IMO win 8.1 was actually quite nice, we had several pcs at work with it. it’s just that windows 7 was as good or even better.
    [/QUOTE]
    I ran 8 and then 8.1 as upgraded from Windows 7, but I had a shell replacement running too when I started using 8 – I never saw most of what the common misgivings with Windows 8.1 were. To me, they might have just as well been Windows 7, and indeed, they really were, with most improvements rather much under the hood and generally unneeded for most.

    Overall, the real stinker was Me, or the ‘Millenium Edition’ for those not aware. Based off of Windows 98 SE (that is, ‘Second Edition’), which was a pretty good base for a consumer OS at the time, Microsoft over-bloated it and managed to ruin what was otherwise a good thing.

  27. [QUOTE=”Stoly, post: 44997, member: 1474″]
    You left out windows 2000 which is IMO the most important OS as it cemented the future of windows with the NT kernel.
    [/QUOTE]
    Too true.
    [QUOTE=”Stoly, post: 44997, member: 1474″]
    Vista sucked in large part because it needed much more ram than the 512mb that it required. At the time 512 was about the most you could have in a PC although 1gb came out soon after.
    [/QUOTE]
    Mine had 4 GB. I later upgraded it to 8 GB. I’d bought a floor model back in the day for around $700-$800 or something along those lines. This thing was a beast. The 640 GB HDD was actually 2x 320 GB drives in RAID0.

    [URL unfurl=”true”]https://www.newegg.com/gateway-fx7026-gaming-entertainment/p/N82E16883113058[/URL]

  28. [QUOTE=”Stoly, post: 44997, member: 1474″]
    You left out windows 2000
    [/QUOTE]
    Well I wasn’t trying to list them all, just kinda bookend the generational breaks and hit the highlights. But you are right, 2K had big changes under the hood.

  29. 2000 was a server class os not a desktop class os. Yea a lot of us ended up running it… myself included .. but it was never intended for desktops or really workstations just ended up in those roles as well. I wouldn’t say it was left out but does warrant a special mention. 😉

  30. This obviously isn’t ideal, but honestly, at the speeds these things currently operate, I doubt anyone would even notice +/- 100MB/s without benchmarking.

    The term “significantly” in the title seems maybe a bit hyperbolic.

  31. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 44973, member: 96″]

    That said, throughout all of these iterations, Windows hasn’t really changed that much from the front face. An OS shouldn’t do much other than facilitate applications to run, and apart from that it should stay out of the way. The best releases in my opinion have been the ones that do that the best.
    [/QUOTE]

    This right here. I hate the modern era when operating systems want to be a complete ecosystem complete with cloud features.

    I just want an operating system with absolutely nothing else provided, where I make the decisions of what software to install.

    I don’t want a freaking weather app, or an email client or even a browser preinstalled. I want the OS to contain nothing. It should be an empty canvas consisting simply of a menu structure and system settings on which I can build.

  32. [QUOTE=”Zarathustra, post: 45026, member: 203″]
    This right here. I hate the modern era when operating systems want to be a complete ecosystem complete with cloud features.

    I just want an operating system with absolutely nothing else provided, where I make the decisions of what software to install.

    I don’t want a freaking weather app, or an email client or even a browser preinstalled. I want the OS to contain nothing. It should be an empty canvas consisting simply of a menu structure and system settings on which I can build.
    [/QUOTE]

    Sounds like a Linux Distro is in your future

  33. [QUOTE=”Brent_Justice, post: 45027, member: 3″]
    Sounds like a Linux Distro is in your future
    [/QUOTE]
    Z is already a pretty heavy Linux user. His Win10 box is for gaming only, everything else is Linux, if I recall correctly.

  34. [QUOTE=”DrezKill, post: 45028, member: 230″]
    Z is already a pretty heavy Linux user. His Win10 box is for gaming only, everything else is Linux, if I recall correctly.
    [/QUOTE]

    You got it.

  35. [QUOTE=”Brent_Justice, post: 45022, member: 3″]
    just personally speaking, for me, the best OS’s have been 98 SE, XP, 7, 10
    [/QUOTE]
    Myself, 98, 2000, XP, 7 and 10.

    I also liked Win 95OSR2, but 98 was just better.

  36. [QUOTE=”Brent_Justice, post: 45027, member: 3″]
    Sounds like a Linux Distro is in your future
    [/QUOTE]
    If there was a linux user for every time I’ve heard that… :giggle: 😀 :p

  37. Skipping the C64 years that don’t really count… nor does Deskmate count on the Tandy systems we sold at the Shack.

    DOS 3.x/5.x/6.x, Win 3.x, WFW 3.11, 95 OG then A B C, 98, ME (briefly but discovered 98 was better), 2K (thank you corp vol license), XP, 2K3 (thanks again, corp lic), Vista (only on 1 laptop that came with it), 7 (everywhere I could), 8.1 (again, on a diff laptop that came with it), Win 10. I see no reason/motivation to move to 11.

    I probably lost some in the mix there. But usually every other Windows is good, and even those need service packs / updates to shine.

  38. I loved Win 2K. NT kernel and direct x support, and let us not forget SMP. Especially when rocking a 440BX on a BP-6, which eventually was swapped for a VP-6 with Tualatins.
    A least till XP Pro emerged. Which by the way, I should be liberating the BP-6 from storage this weekend. That and a Intel Preshott on a Soyo board complete with AIW 9700 Pro box.

    Man, those were good days. Loved Win 7, despised Vista, ME, and anything between 7 and 10.
    Still unsure with 11. I will try it on the 5700G box and go from there. Honestly though, it’s looking like I will ride out 10 and swap more boxes out for Linux. My experience with Manjaro has been stellar. Pop OS was good to me as well. With the Steam Deck coming out, gaming on Linux has been fantastic. So I feel, for my use, I’m covered till either Win 11 comes around, or 12 is out, if I feel I need MS again.

Leave a comment