Post your hard drive benchmarks!

Smirnoff said:
2x 74 GB Raptors 16mb cache in stripping raid with 64k strip size

snip..

Any idea why my benchmarks are so low ?

Specs are, Core2 6600, Crucial 4GB Tenth Anniversary Kit, Evga 680i, 800 GTX

Thanks for any help :)
Click to expand...

As above - the only thing I'll add is that mine scored reeeeally badly on 64K - try 16K or 128K and see what it does.
 
JayMax said:
Got my fourth HDD in my array this morning - comparison chart is the old 3 disk array. Well pleased with the speed of my OS on these as they only cost me ~£15 a piece. Though I am tempted to try SCSI next... never happy :p

3v4qj2.jpg
Click to expand...

Damn that's quick - missed it the first time round - what on earth are you running there?
 
cavemanoc said:
Damn that's quick - missed it the first time round - what on earth are you running there?
Click to expand...

They're 4 x 40Gb Samsung Sata II 8Mb cache in Raid 0. The HD Tach result is probably a bit flattering as I'm using a 40Gb volume for my OS which will be on the outer edges.
I've been picking them up off an auction site for the last month or so. Pretty good bang for the buck as the whole array cost about £60 :)
 
sjohal2006 said:
If i get a new hdd will my pc speed up look at the hdd... :confused:
Click to expand...
You'll notice a huge difference by changing that disk. It's a 5400rpm part which is why the transfer rates are so low. A decent modern 7200rpm disk will give you, as you can see in this thread, a threefold increase in sustained transfers. Not only is that going to improve the boot times but accesses to the swap file will be improved so multi tasking is going to be more responsive.
 
What stripe size are you using vita?

I think i need to invest in a pci-e raid controller, by looking at these benchmarks and putting them against mine there is small increase. :(

Anyone know of any cheap-ish, pci-e raid cards for a quad drive raid 0 array?

I will fork out if its worth the money though. :)
 
Samsung SpinPoint T HD321KJ 320GB SATA-II 16MB

samsungud1.jpg


Thats the new Samsung which has replaced my two below. Great drive - silent as the Samsung range are, plus I put it into the Silentmaxx enclosure, which makes it virtually impossible to hear :D Beats the older Raptor in raw speed but obviously can't compete on access times.

Duke said:
Western Digital Raptor 74 (SATA1, 8MB Cache)

raptor74lt4.jpg



Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 160GB (SATA1, 8MB Cache)

seagate160vd2.jpg
Click to expand...
 
The raptor has a much narrower distribution, what does the x axis relate to on these graphs, file size?

Samsungs are very good on noise except for an old one (still in warranty though) I bought that oscillates for some reason, I had to suspend it in a cobweb of elastic to cut the vibrations
 
I think the x-axis is the sequential read speed through the entire drive. The beginning starts at the outer edges so more of the platter passes through the heads at any given rpm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom