1st ever Harddisk benchmark thread  | | | 
March 6th, 2009, 01:14 AM
|
#41 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Edmonton
Posts: 226
|
Ya I made a You Tube video for the 6GB Quantam Bigfoot using Windows XP 32BIT. For the bench mark. Kinda the first technology based video so ya and it was late too. So if ti sucks oh well. Can not blame me Gonna upload it. I tried this morning but You Tube would not let me. So ya hope it is good and some of you will enjoy it. | 
|  | |
March 6th, 2009, 02:02 AM
|
#42 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,482
|
__________________
Crunching for the cure! Techimo Folding Team# 111
Last edited by 2monsters : March 6th, 2009 at 02:06 AM.
| |
| | |
March 6th, 2009, 02:12 AM
|
#43 (permalink)
| | PC Upgrade Procrastinator
Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Minnesota
Posts: 5,682
|
nope not really, depends, the SCSI disks are slower than SAS drives usually, SCSI is Parallel based like old IDE drives, SAS is Serial like SATA, SAS (Serial Attached SCSI), SAS is partially backwards compatible with SATA, can use SATA in a SAS connector, but not the otherway around.
access times I would guess would be faster, would imagine burst rates or sustained times should be better than PATA also, since SCSI is usually used for Workstations or Servers. But JLK's drives are SATA so that's probably why, higher read/write times than older parallel tech.
__________________ Quote:
Originally Posted by taxi  Why cant I recieve animal each time I am advised that I have no storage space?? | | |
| | |
March 6th, 2009, 12:27 PM
|
#44 (permalink)
| | Super Duper Member
Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Singapore
Posts: 4,180
|
I redid my test 3 times on my WD Caviar 640gb drive because it kept spiking to 5 or 6mb/s, which pissed me off  . Even though I know it doesnt affect the score used on this bench thread. Anyways, in comparison the WD Caviar 250gb drive I have plugged into this rig seems to be pretty consistent, since its not doing anything else. And supprisingly its not that much slower  . I expected it to be quite a bit. Burst rate is almost identical, though the access times are a whole 4 seconds slower. I want an SSD.. like now
Ok I shall redo my test with the 640gb again as a secondary drive and see if I can squeeze another 5mb/s of performance outta this thing. Muhwahwahwa 
WD Caviar 640gb: http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p...myfoot/640.jpg
WD Caviar 250gb: http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p...myfoot/250.jpg
__________________ PII 720BE X3 @ 3.7Ghz | Gigabyte 790GX | HD4850 | 4gigs OCZ Reper | WDC 640gb Black Athlon II 250 X2 @ 3.80Ghz | Gigabyte 770 | HD4670 | 4 gigs OCZ Reper
Last edited by pullmyfoot : March 6th, 2009 at 12:39 PM.
| |
| | |
March 9th, 2009, 03:09 AM
|
#45 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,012
|
Alright, well.. Here's my new RAID setup for now. I ordered a new RAID card because this one apparently sucks... 
Two Western Digital Caviar RE WD1600YS 160GB 7200 RPM 16MB in RAID 0. Intel RAID Controller (ICH9R) for now on my Asus p5k deluxe board.
__________________
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 OCed 50% (3.6GHz) | ASUS P5K Deluxe w/ WIFI | G.Skill 4096MB (4x1024MB) RAM | MSI GTX 275 | 2x Seagate 160GB 7200.11 RAID 0 | |
| | |
March 11th, 2009, 04:49 AM
|
#46 (permalink)
| | Banned by everybody
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 5,041
|
[Jim Carey mode on] Allrighty then!! [Jim Carey mode off]
I updated the stats again, everyone is listed that has posted or sent PM, so
completely up to date again.
Ohh and Retro, don't worry about your new score, you came in on a very comfi 3rd place, so you should be ok 
Only thing faster then your raid setup, is my Caviar Blacks and a set of 3 WD Raptors on raid 0, so no shame being 3rd to those 2
__________________
AMD Phenom II X3 720BE @ X4 920BE 3.6Ghz
4GB DDR3 1333, Dual 4870 1GB in Crossfire
2 x WD Caviar Black 640GB @ raid 0
Last edited by Ultima : March 11th, 2009 at 04:52 AM.
| |
| | |
March 11th, 2009, 05:20 AM
|
#47 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,012
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultima [Jim Carey mode on] Allrighty then!! [Jim Carey mode off]
I updated the stats again, everyone is listed that has posted or sent PM, so
completely up to date again.
Ohh and Retro, don't worry about your new score, you came in on a very comfi 3rd place, so you should be ok
Only thing faster then your raid setup, is my Caviar Blacks and a set of 3 WD Raptors on raid 0, so no shame being 3rd to those 2 | Haha, thanks.
Turns out, being the perfectionist I am, I just RMA'd the new drives after testing them individually at a average ~50MB/s read. 
Ordered some 7200.11 Seagates instead and, if the reviews are right, I'll get about double the speed.
Definitely not my RAID controller/motherboard or anything. Tried two RAID cards, and then tested the drives individually against my other single drives... My 1.5TB Seagate was over twice as fast as them! Err..
So yeah, I'll have a new score up for you in a bit. Ha. Sorry for making you work so hard! | |
| | |
March 11th, 2009, 06:10 AM
|
#48 (permalink)
| | Banned by everybody
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 5,041
|
no problem at all, it's about comparison, and if I get the feeling you make me work too much,......I'll just kick you off the list. LOL j/k
But I expect you to at least come close to me in raid setup, I mean, I knew the Caviar Blacks were fast, but it took 3 Raptors in raid 0 to get close to me, 4 raptoirs would probably beat me tho | |
| | |
March 13th, 2009, 09:33 AM
|
#49 (permalink)
| | Super Duper Member
Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Singapore
Posts: 4,180
|
How come this is in the storage related section? I think its going to be more at home in the benchmarks section like the rest of em dudes
Edit: Hmm, what happened to the benchmarking forum? I havnt been there in a long time, but don't tell me it got removed | |
| | |
March 13th, 2009, 09:38 AM
|
#50 (permalink)
| | \m/(°-°)\m/
Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: In my room
Posts: 12,765
|
Yeah Pull, Scott gave the benchmark section the axe during the last forum "update".
I've complained about it in multiple threads, but I don't think he is listening. lol
All the benchmarks got moved to "general tech discussion"  | |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Most Active Discussions  | | | | |   Recent Discussions  | | | | |
 |
hardware
prices 
