Post your hard drive benchmarks!

2 x 32GB Samsung SLC based SSD

I have finally got my two 32GB Samsung SLC based SSDs on a RAID setup.

Sam32GBx2_SSD.png
 
KarlMcWade said:
So nice bet thats snappy right there !!!!:eek:
Click to expand...

It is rather snappy yes. Loads low performance games like WoW in mere seconds.

FSX is still not tuned, so at the moment I'm a little dissapointed, but the one area where it is not letting me down, is right here on loading from the raid array. Very snappy indeed.

Must say though, my 2x320GB WD in RAID 0 is not that far behind in terms of read/write, but the 0.1ms vs 14ms access times really do make a difference in something like FSX where loads and loads of little files are loaded.
 
No these are ST3250620AS

Thanks for tip. Just installed Intel Matrix manager 8.2 and it automatically enabled the writeback cache on the drives.
I see a nice 60 MBs increase :) Still not quite as fast as yours but that may be down to the difference in drives.

The reason the graph is flat is that Ive created 2 logical drives, the first using the outer edge of the drive (fastest) 220GB as my Video capture drive. Thats the one benchmarked

WBackonly.gif


blackninja said:
Mick-1965 - Are they the Seagate ST3250410AS? Mine are on ICH9 but the difference should not be that great and your graph is very flat too ... see the post below (there are others with even more performence on here!).

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11000315&postcount=568
Click to expand...
 
Mick-1965 said:
Thanks for tip. Just installed Intel Matrix manager 8.2 and it automatically enabled the writeback cache on the drives.
Click to expand...

oh snap.. that gave me a massive benchmark boost! might be a silly question, but why does my burst speed range wildy depending on 8MB/32MB HDtach benches?

2x1TB F1's, raid0, 128k:

14789905cn0.jpg
 
Pablo1870@h*x*s) said:
I would caution that people research for versions of their Hardrive options, that ACTUALLY implement the NCQ feature. The difference between desktop (non-raid only) implemented NCQ and drives that will only allow u to use them in raid, has actually been measured. The difference can be 50% in speed or more when multitaking.

The samsung 1TB and the seagate 7200.11'sand the WD 640mb versions are the only ones i am aware of that currently do this.

http://forums.storagereview.net/inde...howtopic=26965

and

http://forums.storagereview.net/inde...howtopic=26006

desktop use is multi instance access,
Click to expand...
 
I changed from sata boot / system drive to a scsi 15k 72gb boot drive that made a massive difference over a 160gb sata 7200, everything felt faster.. best thing is as the server at work HAD a hot spare the raid is still redundant.. lets jstu hope it never needs the hot spare!
 
so i take it the drives are partitioned for the first 40 gb (is that were performance drops off on them) 4 x 40 160 gb raid 0 C:\ drive the rest of the array is the D form the slower inner sections of drive ?

very nice cannot wait to see the ssd drive x4 in raid 0 benchies
wallet has held out so far but its payday tonight !!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom