On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 22:25:42 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 19/10/2016 19:38, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:24:43 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip good stuff for brevity

Yes, I understand that's what you are saying but can you offer any way
of substantiating it? Or more accurately, is there any way you could
help me substantiate it for myself on the SSD / System (dual booting
W10 and Mint 18) here?

There is a simple empirical solution... if you have a system with non
aligned partitions (and that would only be likely if you have partitions
originally created by an old OS (pre Vista kind of time frame)),

(or if you had cloned the drive from a conventional one as I have with
the laptop in question...?)

It would still need to be a partition created some time ago. Windows has
done 4K alignment and a start offset of 1024K since Vista, and I think
Linux had support about the same time or slightly before.

I can't remember how it came into being but checking using the
information you mentioned previously suggested they weren't aligned.
Checking same round mates (with a SSD boot drive running W7) and his
were.

then
benchmark the disk. Then run one of the partition alignment tools and
benchmark again.

Yes, that's what I suggested I could do but wasn't aware of ant
specific tools to do it with. eg, I'm aware of generic PC benchmarking
utilities but not knowing all the answers I would like to know if
there was a recommended utility for highlighting such things. I ask
because I am also aware of Utilities that can be confused and *not*
report the true facts.

So long as you use the same for both tests, then you should get a basis
for comparison.

I like the 'should' there John. ;-)

Crystal Disk Mark is not bad IIRC:

http://crystalmark.info/software/Cry...k/index-e.html

Ok thanks, I'll give that a go.

Cheers, T i m