Subpar plotting results with Ryzen 5900x : Does plotting speed decrease as SSD wears out?

Hello there. I’m plotting with Madmax on a rig with a Ryzen 5900x, 32gb RAM @ 3200mhz and a 2TB SSD as temp disk (M.2 ADATA 2TB XPG S50 Lite). BIOS and software (including Madmax) are updated to the latest stable version.

I know the M2 is no the best out there, but I’ve plotted about 35TB so far and I was able to complete plots in about 70 minutes, but now I’m averaging 150 minutes per plot, which seems very bad considering the rest of the setup.

I’m experiencing frequent crashes in the Madmax powershell and sometimes Windows’ explorer freezes. I noticed that when I experience those crashes, if I try to access the suspected M2 from windows explorer it never finishes to load the contents of the disk, forcing me to hard reset the computer.

I didn’t make any changes to hardware or software configuration to justify the increase in plotting time, so I’m wondering if it is possible that plotting speed worsens as the SSD health does? (currently at ~70%).

I don’t know where to start troubleshooting, so any help would be appreciated.

Which MM version did you use before and which one now? You also have too little ram for madmax and your SSD is bad for plotting in general not to mention madmax. I would suggest you install linus and go old school CLI plotting with the regular plotter.

Also which software do you use for the ram drive?

It seems you have no clue about plotting with MadMax at all. Since he only has 32GB RAM, it’s just impossible to have a ramdisk that will be usable with MadMax. MadMax needs at least 128GB RAM for that :sweat_smile:

But if you’re not doing parallel plotting and only use SSD for both -t and -2, 32GB RAM would be totally more than enough to plot on MadMax. Since the plotter only uses 4GB of RAM per plot plus another 0.5GB per thread.

And whether you use MadMax on Windows or Linux, you would have to plot using CLI.


I plotted more than 150TB already on a single Corsair MP600 Pro, the speed doesn’t decline a bit. And you’re not changing your configuration at all, the only possible cause I can think of is that your SSD might need to be TRIM. You can start from this first and see a result.

And it’s worth mentioning that I see a lot of people get below 30 mins/plot with 5900X. If you’re getting 70 mins/plot, it seems a serious issue needs to be fixed, let alone 150 mins/plots.

You were saying? There are options to include RAM similar to a RAM drive when plotting chia for people with less then 128 GB…

And yes, it is totally possible that someone creates as 110G Ram disk with just 32 GB Ram… However, that would extremely hurt performance.

You have no clue of what ramdisk is. Ramdisk means you use your RAM as a storage device. Therefore if you want to create 110G of ramdisk, you will need at least 110G RAM available. It is NOT possible to create 110G ramdisk with only 32GB RAM.

Your screenshot doesn’t relate to ramdisk at all :sweat_smile:


And yes, you can create a Ram Drive of more than you have RAM… Yes, it does not make sense but it is technically possible and I bet many people do that and wonder why maxmax is so slow.

That’s why I told you that you have no clue at all of what ramdisk is. What you’re doing is using your storage space as your RAM contrary to using your RAM as storage space. It’s called pagefile in Windows or swapfile in Linux.

And it’s unnecessary to use pagefile if you’re going to use SSD for plotting on MadMax. You can just specify only -t and your -2 will be the same as -t by default. I don’t see any reason for your setup. It seems you have no clue at all about plotting in general.

In fact, if you have many SSDs, you better RAID 0 your SSDs for much better performance rather than using a pagefile.

1 Like

That is not a pagefile but 4x64GB 3200 Mhz Samsung RDIMM. LOL.

And yes, I was talking about the fact that people use their pagefile as their ramdisk when they set up a ramdisk which is exceeding the total capacity of their phychical RAM modules.

I even posted a Task Manager Screenshot of the RAM (~200G) in use with 0% load on any SSD or HDD. The fact that despite the screenshots, which show completely the opposite, you still assumed I would have made the mistake I wanted to create awareness for, is really funny and shows you fundamental lack of knowledge about PC hardware. Wanna do a chia log analysis next?

For everyone else. If you create a 110G Ramdisk but you have only 32G RAM, Windows will hotswap the stuff that is supposed to go to the RAM on your C:\ drive or what is setup as swap drive with a pagefile.sys. Then you do not use the fast speed of your ram or any of your fancy SSDs but the speed of whatever drive you use as C:. This will significantly slow down your system in general.


Sorry just reminded me of that scene! LOL :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

That is not a pagefile but 4x64GB 3200 Mhz Samsung RDIMM. LOL.

I am not sure why you would post that screenshot if it’s neither ramdisk nor pagefile. I can only assume it’s pagefile since we’re talking about that, not the actual RAM which the OP does not have.

I can only see that your post has no benefit at all to the community. Moreover, it leads others to confusion since it’s not correct information.

This is where the confusion was created. By some stupid person who is not able to commit that he made one, well actually several, mistakes. Good luck to anyone who tries to have a conversation with that lad. Unless for teaching a bigger audience some important lesson it’s a big waste of time.

Just for the general audience. If you had create a too large Ramdisk, Windows would not show your in the Taskmanager that you suddenly have more physical RAM but your C:\ would be very busy.

You don’t need a ramdisk to run mad max, so I don’t know why you said he had too little ram to use the plotter. Mad max can plot on SSDs just fine, even hard drives.

As for OP, what are your settings. A lot of windows users have complained about a reduction in performance after updating to stotiks’ latest build, but I suspect they were using non-optimal settings and something changed to make those much slower.

Most tutorials explain it by using a Ram Drive. Hence, I assumed the possibility of him using a RAM drive and actually abusing his pagefile on C:/.

But yeah, my initial statement should have been that he has too little RAM to use MadMax with a Ram Drive. This I have to admit. Wording was a bit unlucky.

Thanks for the reply.

The previous MM version was v0.0.6 and we are on v0.1.1 now.

Why do you say 32gb is too little? I rarely see RAM consumption over 30 or 40% TBH. Same with the CPU, it rarely reaches 100%.

I’m considering buying more RAM to have a 128gb RAM disk as it seems the natural way to go considering the rest of the setup.
I suppose that answers your question about the software for the ram drive? Since I don’t have any ram disks.

Don’t bother with the ram disk, windows ram disks are fairly low performance. What settings are you using when you plot?

Please post the exact command you use to run MadMax and explain us that the Hardware Modell of every drive is that you use in this command.

I have like 30 GB/s sequential write and read on my Ram Drive… What values do you achive on Linux?

I don’t bother to benchmark sequential read/write, but with 2x xeon 2678v3 and 110G tempfs I finish a plot in 23 minutes.

You only do one parallel? You can increase output by adding RAM and doing multiple parallel. If you check you CPU load you will notice that it is very low 50% of the time. In that time, you could run a second plot if you had enough RAM and increase average ouput per hour.