Hard Drive Speeds - Page 3
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Hard Drive Speeds

  1. #21
    HYBR|D
    Guest
    Are you using the free shareware version or the Paid Version of HDD Tune?

    Have you heard / used http://crystalmark.info/software/Cry.../index-e.html/ Before?

    Here's a random Benchmark from CrystalMark
    CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
    Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

    Sequential Read : 197.453 MB/s
    Sequential Write : 196.491 MB/s
    Random Read 512KB : 56.467 MB/s
    Random Write 512KB : 95.983 MB/s
    Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 0.636 MB/s [ 155.3 IOPS]
    Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 1.399 MB/s [ 341.7 IOPS]
    Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 1.306 MB/s [ 318.9 IOPS]
    Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 1.435 MB/s [ 350.4 IOPS]

    Test : 1000 MB [L: 2.7% (25.1/931.5 GB)] (x1)
    Date : 2012/01/02 17:02:01
    OS : Windows 7 Ultimate Edition SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)
    Also regarding boot time since swapping onto these new drives did you notice a increase from pressing the power button to a fully loaded desktop or would you consider cold boot time remains the same if not similiar?

    Also have you done any video encoding Benchmarking comparisions?
    Last edited by HYBR|D; July 7th, 2012 at 07:41 AM.

  2. #22
    Super Moderator: GMT Zone nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,190
    Hi,

    It is the free version of HDD Tune.

    Yes, I have both Crystal Diskmark and Diskinfo. I haven't tried to run it on these machines though, as I prefer the graphical interface.

    I haven't tried video encoding as I don't do it and these are not the primary drives. Another factor would be that there is an imbalance between the processors and video cards, which I guess would affect video benchmarks more than the HDD?

    As both machines have SATA III SSDs, there is no noticeable difference in start-up times.


    EDIT:

    I have now sort of decided on phase 2. I have removed the 1000GB Seagates, and replaced them with the 1500GB versions. That leaves me the two 1000GB ones to put in my AMD test rigs.

    These are as follows:

    Rig #3

    AMD Phenom II 965BE 3.4GHz Quad Core [stock settings]
    8GB DDR3 1333MHz
    Corsair SATA III 60GB SSD
    AMD/ATI Radeon HD whatever........details to follow....... 1GB DDR5

    Rig #4

    AMD FX4100BE 3.4~3.8GHz (?) "Quad Core"......they say? [stock settings]
    8GB DDR3 1333MHz
    Corsair SATA III 60GB SSD
    AMD/ATI Radeon HD 6770 1GB DDR5

    Not sure about the RAM, one is Corsair and the other Kingston, neither being "budget"
    Last edited by nihil; July 7th, 2012 at 07:40 PM.
    If you cannot do someone any good: don't do them any harm....
    As long as you did this to one of these, the least of my little ones............you did it unto Me.
    What profiteth a man if he gains the entire World at the expense of his immortal soul?

  3. #23
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    251
    Be interested , if you can do it that is, in seeing the outcome of the Seagates as the boot drive with the AMD rigs.
    Been following your findings right closely.

  4. #24
    Super Moderator: GMT Zone nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,190
    Hi there Shay,

    I have installed one of the 1000GB Seagates as the single primary drive in a Phenom II x2 560BE (no partitions). That's a twin core running at 3.3GHz with no turbo or hyper-threading (well, TBH it's a BE quad core, but I turned that little cheat off for the purposes of this exercise), 8 GB Kingston HyperX 1333MHz DDR3. ATI/AMD Radeon HD 5670.

    The first thing that I noticed was that HD Tune failed to complete...... for some reason it thought that I had a 2199GB drive!!! even though it seemed to work just fine on the Intel platforms?

    I then decided to use Crystal, as there didn't seem to be any problem with it on either platform.

    It runs its tests 5 times each pass, and I ran it for 5 passes. I am only giving the results for the 1000MB sequential read/write, and the 512KB random read/write. I am expressing them as a range as they were so close.

    I also tested the slave drive on the Core-i5 3570 machine. This is the 1500GB version of the drive and must have two platters as opposed to one.

    Phenom II: [values are read/write in MB/sec]

    1000MB sequential 178~184/167~171
    512KB random 42~44/89~91

    Core-i5: [1500GB slave drive]

    1000MB sequential 159~160/156~158
    512KB random 55~56/84~87

    Incidentally, both the 1000GB and 1500GB drives cost the same over here, so the 1500GB is perceived to be the weaker performer?

    As an aside, the Seagate "Seatools" doesn't run on Windows 8 and Windows tells you about it! Also, Windows now gives the drive the traditional 5.9 rating on the WEI !!! when it was 7.45 on an Intel platform.

    As I see it we just have some more questions at this stage?

    Firstly, I am not that happy about the older technology ASRock MoBo in the AMD test rig..... I will swap that out for an ASUS that I already have for that reason.

    Secondly, I have the other Seagate 1000GB drive to test in the same environments. I might have one that is going dud on me?

    Thirdly, I have the AMD FX4100 to try out.

    Fourthly, there is the other 1500GB slave drive on an Intel i-7 platform, that seemed a bit weak in the last round? I haven't fired Crystal at that yet.

    Fifthly, as I am using Crystal as the test mechanism, how do other makes of drive that I bought just before the Thai floods perform?

    Unfortunately, I do not have the luxury of a properly equipped test facility where I can isolate individual components for scrutiny.

    I am pretty sure that the processor/RAM have a considerable influence here, as I did the first test run before I turned off the two hidden cores and got maybe 12~15% better results.

    Anyways, this is a single core AMD Athlon XP2400+, it has 333MHz single channel DDR1 memory and a 160GB Seagate PATA HDD as primary.

    It scored:

    42/46
    21/21

    No wonder it took me so long to type this post
    If you cannot do someone any good: don't do them any harm....
    As long as you did this to one of these, the least of my little ones............you did it unto Me.
    What profiteth a man if he gains the entire World at the expense of his immortal soul?

  5. #25
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    251
    That barton would come out like that.
    Was a right nice cpu in its day.

    And the other scores are right nice to see. And they walked all over what my rig did.

    Appreciate all the work you have done! Thanks.

  6. #26
    Super Moderator: GMT Zone nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,190
    Hi,

    I have tested the second Seagate 1500GB slave drive that is in the Core-i7

    1000MB Sequential 158~167/156~165
    512KB Random 55~57/84~90

    That is pretty consistent with the other drive.

    I also looked at the slave drive in the Phenom II x4 965BE which has a 2000GB drive running at 5,940rpm. It is about a year old.

    [Hitachi HDS5C3020ALA632]

    Sequential 140~140/137~139
    Random 50~51/60~63

    Very consistent results over the 5 test runs that I did?

    Another fun comparison?

    Asus EeePC (about 9 months old)

    Intel Atom 1.66GHz dual core with hyper-threading. A "netbook" in fact.
    250GB HDD running at 5400rpm SATA II, 1GB DDR3 667MHz

    Sequential 64~65/61~64
    Random 23~24/20~23

    Windows7 gives that a WEI of 5.8

    Who needs 250GB in a netbook for heaven's sake? I shall probably swap it out for an SSD and use the HDD for backups via my external docking station.

    Performance wise it feels about the same or a bit slower than the Athlon XP2400+ (Barton core). Personally I think that the access has been fixed to keep temperatures down.

    Next I will try the other Seagate 1000GB as the primary drive in the FX4100 box, then rebuild the PHENOM II x2 with the first one.

    If you cannot do someone any good: don't do them any harm....
    As long as you did this to one of these, the least of my little ones............you did it unto Me.
    What profiteth a man if he gains the entire World at the expense of his immortal soul?

  7. #27
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    251
    Seen a good number of folks use a netbook to backup the graphics on their camera memory chips. A bit of added work true, but if you hate to lose what you have, it is a worthwhile thing to do. OK, so i use a lapptop, and USB enclosure, will now see if I can get a eSATA enclosure.

  8. #28
    Super Moderator: GMT Zone nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,190
    Hi Shay,

    Seen a good number of folks use a netbook to backup the graphics on their camera memory chips.
    That makes a lot of sense, as both my netbook and the laptop that my wife has appropriated from me have a card reader slot on the side. I have put a 4GB card in the netbook and might have another go at that "go slower" technology that will use it as cache memory?

    What surprised me is that the Compaq CT61 laptop also has a 250GB drive, albeit a 7,200rpm one. 250GB for a netbook seems enormous to me, given that I have yet to see a "fondleslab" with more than 32GB, and those are supposed to replace net-books as I understand?

    I feel that a 120GB SSD would improve the net-book's performance a lot, and would make no difference at all to it's functionality, given that it is supposed to be a mobile device that is synchronised to something more stable?

    I can double the RAM for a small cost, but it doesn't seem to be having problems there.

    Now, I would like an explanation here, as we obviously have slightly different terminologies in the US and UK.

    You mentioned an HDD "enclosure" is that just an external drive without the drive in it? You fit your own afterwards?

    If so, that's what we call a "caddy". They are fine and I have a 3.5" PATA one that I just opened up following your post...........I hadn't noticed that it had SATA II connections as well ........ it was sold to me as PATA?.......... hey! that turned out an even better deal than I thought!!!

    Actually, I prefer my docking station that vertically mounts either 2.5" or 3.5" SATA drives......handy for doing support work, as there are no screws just a simple mount/dismount, and I can use it to back up on multiple drives, when not using it as a repair tool.

    I am looking for a USB3 one to go with it, as my modern kit all has USB3. That brings me on to eSATA. Two of my modern ones have a port for that on the back of the MoBo. Two others have a pair of internal SATA connectors in the middle of the MoBo, but I would need an expansion bracket and cable to get them to work.

    I have been thinking about this, as you can get USB3 external devices that promise transfer rates of 150 to 200MBps; and, following my recent tests, that is all that an external electro-mechanical drive will support. Will eSATA give better performance?

    I will post more test results tomorrow
    If you cannot do someone any good: don't do them any harm....
    As long as you did this to one of these, the least of my little ones............you did it unto Me.
    What profiteth a man if he gains the entire World at the expense of his immortal soul?

  9. #29
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    251
    is that just an external drive without the drive in it? You fit your own afterwards?
    That is a yes for both questions.

    Our caddy mounts in the computer case and you can swap HDDS.

    eSATA is setup native on this laptop and using a 3 TB USB 3.0 GoFlex desk external drive, it took me about 2 hours to transfer 84 GB today. Guess what has USB 2.0 native.
    This will now be my travel backup drive and the eSATA will be my storage swap setup.
    Yes, I store off site. And the new rigs, will get a couple new desktops, will build or have custom built, Will have both eSATA and USB 3.0.
    The 500 GB hdd in this laptop is a tad small as the better half snaps a lot of piccys when we travel by car.

    That netbook would be faster starting up, opening programs, folders and the like with a SSD. Probably much faster. Most netbooks I have got a hold of have about a 5200 RPM hdd in them. Hit a old acer that had a 4200 in it that was replaced with a 5200/5400 and it made a nice see able difference. Just realized the old Quantum 5.25 8.4 AT I have probably out weights the netbook.

  10. #30
    Super Moderator: GMT Zone nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,190
    Just realized the old Quantum 5.25 8.4 AT I have probably out weights the netbook.
    I have just weighed my Quantum Bigfoot 12GB and it comes in at 2lbs 10oz; the Asus Netbook weighs 2lbs 2oz

    Your transfer rate works out at around 12MBps which I think is rather slow for internal to external HDDs. It's the kind of rate I would expect for a stick drive. People I know with external drives tell me they get up to 30MBps.

    Given that SATA is mostly intended for drives connections I would expect that to work a lot faster for you, given that even the SATA I standard has to support transfer rates of up to 187.5MBps. That means that your actual rates should only depend on the performance capabilities of the two HDDs you are transferring between?

    USB is a bit of a cheat IMO as anything above 1.5MBps qualifies as USB2. At least with USB3 you know that it has to exceed 60MBps to meet the standard.

    Our caddy mounts in the computer case and you can swap HDDS.
    I think that we call those "hot swap bays", thanks for the information.

    Along those lines and with a security emphasis, I have a couple of devices that screw mount into 5.25" bays. There is a frame or skeleton and a removable drawer or tray. You screw the HDD into the drawer and slide it into the frame where the power and data connections (Molex/PATA) are made. The frame connects to the PSU and MoBo at the back.

    When you finish work, you remove the drawer with the HDD in it and lock it in a fireproof safe. So, if you have a fire or your computer is stolen, you still have all your data almost immediately available.

    Back in the day, it was also a good way to transport large amounts of data, as 160GB HDDs were reasonably affordable, and viable external drives weren't available (USB 1.1?).
    If you cannot do someone any good: don't do them any harm....
    As long as you did this to one of these, the least of my little ones............you did it unto Me.
    What profiteth a man if he gains the entire World at the expense of his immortal soul?

Similar Threads

  1. IDE Hard Drive Diagnostics Machine
    By wiskic10_4 in forum Hardware
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: September 17th, 2010, 01:03 PM
  2. installing new hard drive....
    By bagggi in forum Hardware
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: April 26th, 2009, 08:09 PM
  3. Changing Drive Letter
    By mikem0327 in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: September 25th, 2003, 02:23 AM
  4. Getting a bad hard drive to spin?
    By problemchild in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 4th, 2002, 01:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •