Why is my hard drive performance crap? - Page 2

Feek · 06-01-2007, 22:29

No, it was 80 core. I was using the original shuttle cables and that was the very short one.

I need some HD benchmarking software so at least I can see what they're doing.

Garp · 06-01-2007, 22:42

HDTach for the win!
http://www.simplisoftware.com/Public...request=HdTach

Mark · 06-01-2007, 22:42

http://www.simplisoftware.com/Public...request=HdTach

Think that's what most people use - haven't tried it myself.

Feek · 06-01-2007, 22:51

Should have done before and after I suppose, but I'll give it a try.

Thanks both

Garp · 07-01-2007, 00:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Le Feek

Should have done before and after I suppose, but I'll give it a try.

Thanks both

If you post what you're getting now it should give us some hint at whether its good or not.

Feek · 07-01-2007, 01:33

Drive in blue is my boot drive and the red one is my second drive, the one I use mainly for storage of iso files waiting to be burned. I thought that they were the other way around, that the boot drive was a bit slower but I got that wrong.

Page file is on the red drive. Hmmmm.

mejinks · 07-01-2007, 01:50

Its not a million miles away in read speed from a SATA 300 drive:

Garp · 07-01-2007, 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by mejinks

Its not a million miles away in read speed from a SATA 300 drive:

How'd you figure that then? His burst speed is attrocious! Its barely half what you achieve!

edit: Doh...

Neither of those drives are SATA are they?

My IDE hdd which I use for backups manages 72.7mb/s burst, and 52.2 MB/s average speed which is still better than any of Feek's speeds, so may be some indication of concern.

Feek · 07-01-2007, 15:36

My Hitachi drive has a maximum data transfer rate of 100 MB/s and it's nearly hitting that on burst. The sustained data rate is 29.7 to 61.4 so the average of 50.1 MB/s is what I'd expect.

The Seagate again has a maximum rate of 100MB/s sustained is quoted at 27 to 44 so 35.1MB/s is about right.

Shows the limitations of IDE compared to newer hardware.

Feek · 20-03-2007, 19:01

Ahhh, Necroposting for the win.

Even knowing the figures were accurate on the old box, it never felt quick, it actually felt sluggish.

This is better! Much faster and it feels blindingly quick.

I'm happy

06-01-2007, 22:29	#11
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	No, it was 80 core. I was using the original shuttle cables and that was the very short one. I need some HD benchmarking software so at least I can see what they're doing. __________________

06-01-2007, 22:42	#12
Garp Preparing more tumbleweed Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Hawaii Posts: 6,038	HDTach for the win! http://www.simplisoftware.com/Public...request=HdTach __________________ Mal: Define "interesting"? Wash: "Oh, God, oh, God, we're all gonna die"?

06-01-2007, 22:51	#14
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	Should have done before and after I suppose, but I'll give it a try. Thanks both __________________

07-01-2007, 01:33	#16
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	Drive in blue is my boot drive and the red one is my second drive, the one I use mainly for storage of iso files waiting to be burned. I thought that they were the other way around, that the boot drive was a bit slower but I got that wrong. Page file is on the red drive. Hmmmm. __________________

07-01-2007, 15:36	#19
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	My Hitachi drive has a maximum data transfer rate of 100 MB/s and it's nearly hitting that on burst. The sustained data rate is 29.7 to 61.4 so the average of 50.1 MB/s is what I'd expect. The Seagate again has a maximum rate of 100MB/s sustained is quoted at 27 to 44 so 35.1MB/s is about right. Shows the limitations of IDE compared to newer hardware. __________________

06-01-2007, 22:42	#13
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	http://www.simplisoftware.com/Public...request=HdTach Think that's what most people use - haven't tried it myself.

20-03-2007, 19:01	#20
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	Ahhh, Necroposting for the win. Even knowing the figures were accurate on the old box, it never felt quick, it actually felt sluggish. This is better! Much faster and it feels blindingly quick. I'm happy __________________