Post your hard drive benchmarks!

2Thumbs · 23 Sep 2008 at 23:17

Single IDE Western Digital RE 320GB drive.

Not sure what's up with the graph at 150... dual-platter?

Wiggins · 24 Sep 2008 at 10:10

Samsung F1 500GB.

helmutcheese · 24 Sep 2008 at 13:42

2Thumbs said:
Single IDE Western Digital RE 320GB drive.

Not sure what's up with the graph at 150... dual-platter?

No, something accessed your HDD during the test.

That's pretty slow for a HDD that can do 91-95MB when its SATA300 (same RE3 320GB).

jrwagh333 · 27 Sep 2008 at 22:09

is this good for a 300GB VelociRaptor?

helmutcheese · 27 Sep 2008 at 22:53

Something is accessing HDD during test, and if it gets 103MB/Sec every time then I guess its 1 of the early 300GB's with the older Firmware and older Caddy.

Just run the short test. less chance of something using HDD at the same time.

jrwagh333 · 27 Sep 2008 at 23:04

Is this better?
Yeah its one of the older ones, didn't want to pay the extra £20

I read everywhere that the seek time is 4.2ms but in my HDTach test & in other people I've seen it says 7.0ms?

Do you know why this is?

helmutcheese · 28 Sep 2008 at 15:47

jrwagh333 said:
Is this better?
Yeah its one of the older ones, didn't want to pay the extra £20

I read everywhere that the seek time is 4.2ms but in my HDTach test & in other people I've seen it says 7.0ms?

Do you know why this is?

A bit better and more than the 103MB/Sec most reviews got on old ones.

I ain't sure on the SEEK but Acoustic Management is enabled at a moderate level, you can kill it with Hitachi's Feature Tool.

4.1 is AVG seek same as 120MB/Sec is WD's claims of speed but its Cache to Disk not AVG Sustained Read Speed.

I get same 7.0 as you seems by reading it should be nearer 4.0 but I cant get much info on it.

Tombo · 28 Sep 2008 at 16:05

WD Caviar Blue 6400AKS 640GB.

Samsung HD161HJ

WD Caviar 250GB.

helmutcheese said:
I get same 7.0 as you seems by reading it should be nearer 4.0 but I cant get much info on it.

The access time in the spec is the lowest not the average, is it not?

helmutcheese · 28 Sep 2008 at 16:33

From WD

Seek Times
Read Seek Time 4.2 ms
Write Seek Time 4.7 ms (average)
Track-To-Track Seek Time 0.7 ms (average)

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=494

h20 · 29 Sep 2008 at 11:34

2Thumbs · 29 Sep 2008 at 22:57

helmutcheese said:
No, something accessed your HDD during the test.

That's pretty slow for a HDD that can do 91-95MB when its SATA300 (same RE3 320GB).

Ah I see.

Can't see it being comparable with a RE3, it's over 2 years old.

JBod · 30 Sep 2008 at 21:02

^JP^ said:
Just got my 3 OCZ 64gb SSD drives from OCUK and installed them on my old Intel BX2 board which has ICH7R Raid Controller.

Vista 64 Ultimate with no updates (not even SP1)
Chip Set drivers and Matrix Storage Console only

128 Stripe Size

CPU is a little high but other than that I am pretty happy so far.

Have you seen the write performance with random access that Anandtech has reported? or does the raid alleviate this problem?

Robert1986 · 30 Sep 2008 at 21:25

I take it this is bad?

lmfy2k · 7 Oct 2008 at 19:51

How does this look?

Flukester · 10 Oct 2008 at 15:43

2 * WD640AAKS raid 0 on onboard ICH9R controller, default stripe size. Think access times abit poor as it's a 5min old install and vista is going bananas

quite a nice improvement over single AAKS...

PiKe · 10 Oct 2008 at 16:10

JBod said:
Have you seen the write performance with random access that Anandtech has reported? or does the raid alleviate this problem?

What problems?

John24 · 11 Oct 2008 at 02:04

PiKe said:
What problems?

Have a look on OCZ`s forums.

Craigius · 11 Oct 2008 at 10:13

Here is mine

Mr Kingston · 11 Oct 2008 at 16:41

Not bad for a laptop drive eh ?

helmutcheese · 11 Oct 2008 at 17:02

Shouldn't make any difference today if the Lappy had a 7.2K HDD as it will be SATA150 or SATA300 anyhow.