Post your hard drive benchmarks!

4x Western Digital WD2500KS Sata II 16Mb cache, RAID 0, Intel i975X onboard sata raid controller:

hdtune.gif
 
Mr Footlong said:
4x Western Digital WD2500KS Sata II 16Mb cache, RAID 0, Intel i975X onboard sata raid controller:

hdtune.gif
Click to expand...

Yikes that's fast for an onboard controller - not having this - my Scsi's are getting a kick up the rear and will do better or they're going to the bay :mad:
 
RJC said:
My RAID 0 array (2 x Samsung spinpoints)

Rob
Click to expand...
That's kinda slow for a 2 disk array - the peak speed is 80% of the way along the array whereas it should be fastest at 0%, like your single disk.

Can you post some more details of the setup and we'll see if we can't get a bit more speed out of them for you.
 
rpstewart said:
That's kinda slow for a 2 disk array - the peak speed is 80% of the way along the array whereas it should be fastest at 0%, like your single disk.

Can you post some more details of the setup and we'll see if we can't get a bit more speed out of them for you.
Click to expand...

Hi, thanks, When checking other peoples I thought it looked slow: At the moment Im running ES6600 @ 2.7Ghz, DFI Infinity 975x/g and 2GB of Geil Ram.
Below is another screen shot, in the BIOS I disabled force Gen II and let the intel matrix sort it out, in terms of performance very little gained. EDIT nothing gained.

test2sz6.jpg


If you need any more info let us know.

Rob
 
RJC said:
If you need any more info let us know.

Rob
Click to expand...
How are the SATA ports configured in the BIOS? Looking at the manual I reckon they should be:

SATA Mode: RAID
On Chip Serial ATA: Auto
SATA Port Speed Settings: Force Gen 2

The other things to check are:

Are the HDDs running in SATA2 mode if they're capable of doing so - check for a jumper on the drive itself.

Is NCQ turned off in the Matrix RAID config?
 
rpstewart said:
How are the SATA ports configured in the BIOS? Looking at the manual I reckon they should be:

SATA Mode: RAID
On Chip Serial ATA: Auto
SATA Port Speed Settings: Force Gen 2

The other things to check are:

Are the HDDs running in SATA2 mode if they're capable of doing so - check for a jumper on the drive itself.

Is NCQ turned off in the Matrix RAID config?
Click to expand...

Hi, I have doubled checked the drives and they require a jumper for 1.5g which was never used so the drive should be running in SATA 2 mode.

Checked the BIOS and the:
SATA Mode: RAID
On Chip Serial ATA: Enhance mode (Grayed out when RAID is selected)
SATA Port Speed Settings: Back to force Gen 2

The hard drive are in ports 1 & 2

The Matrix RAID Config shows NCQ Yes for both drives how can I disable this?
I can not see any options to disable.

Just to let you know this board was sent bck to DFI for repair few weeks ago due to the board incorrectly showing cpu speed and soon as you tried to correct this the pc failed to boot, looks like they made the board up to the next revision. (bought July 06).

Many thanks for your help rpstewart.

Rob
 
Scoobie Dave said:
150GB Raptor, faster than my old 74GB (8mb cache!)

HDTune_Benchmark_WDCWD1500ADFD-00NL.png
Click to expand...

Blimely my Raptor was running at 52c :eek:

Now that I have moved the Raptor to a different drive bay it's running at 34c! :D
 
Last edited:
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
 
Some Single Drive benchies

500GB AAKS:


400GB KS:


4 year old 120GB JD:


I have an 8, 750gb drive raid 0 array which i need to get round to benching at some point. :D:eek:
 
Seagate Cheetah 146gb ST3146854LC 15k 8mb cache on an onboard LSI U160 controller
man-2.jpg


Fujitsu 18gb MAN3184MC 10k 8mb cache on an onboard LSI U160 controller
cheetah.jpg
 
sr4470 said:
Seagate 320GB 7200.10 SATA2 16 MB cache, NForce 410 onboard SATA2 controller.
Is that the fastest single drive in this thread? :eek: :p
Click to expand...
There's something not right with that trace, that drive cannot transfer data at that rate. Try the long benchmark and see what that gives you, I think the short bench has been fooled by some caching somewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom