1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Hard drive speed

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by ex_reven, Jul 6, 2007.

  1. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    I have a RAID setup and I just ran HDD tach. The burst speed seems decent but the sequential read seems very slow...or am I paranoid?

    [​IMG]

    Feel free to post your own benchmarks images/speeds too :)
  2. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    7,689 (2.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,611
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    Well with my one 500gb SATA2 drive I average 54MB/s...I forget what burst is.

    I'd say you're doing pretty damn good dude! :toast:
  3. Namslas90 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    Messages:
    4,851 (1.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    555
    Location:
    Earth
    Thats about right, the speed won't double in RAID. Seq-Read is dependant on DATA Density.
  4. DOM

    DOM

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,552 (2.51/day)
    Thanks Received:
    828
    Location:
    TX, USA
    [​IMG]
  5. nora.e New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Messages:
    245 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Location:
    Boontullie MN.
    [​IMG]
    Here's mine, though I have no idea what it means. Someone care to inturpret?
  6. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    I knew it wouldnt double in speed. I just expected around the 120-150mb/sec mark. Any increase is good though :D. Any way to further increase performance? (Apart from defrag and doing that "enhanced performance" thingy in properties).
  7. Chewy

    Chewy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,289 (1.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    148
    Location:
    Halifax, Canada
    It does seem a tad low I get 105mb/s with my 2 drives.. I think the 320's use 2 heads from what I heard, maybe thats why. Still pwning though Raid owns.
  8. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    7,689 (2.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,611
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    Kursah's Baraccuda 7200.9 500GB

    Here's mine, I didn't break 52MB/s, but I usually average around 52-54. So I'm still close! But you can see how much faster your 500GB Raid is compared to my 500GB SATA2 drive. :toast:

    Attached Files:

  9. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,914 (5.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,063
    Location:
    Ohio
    He's showing off :eek:
    Crunching for Team TPU
  10. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    who?
  11. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,914 (5.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,063
    Location:
    Ohio
    Oh, you know who... :nutkick: :cry:
    Crunching for Team TPU
  12. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    oh.
    Im not, it was honestly a serious question. Pinchy said he got 150mb/sec, and i was just wondering why my setup didnt reach that.
  13. DRDNA

    DRDNA

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,778 (1.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    566
    Location:
    New York
    In raid 0 it does just about double ! At least on all my arrays it does (that is in Raid-0)
    And yes thats about right for your array;)I am running the Perps and there sata2's running on a sata 1 mobo my burst suck azz but thats cuz my mobo wasnt for hard drive speed more for overclockin the ram and cpu....on my two 250 gigs in raid 0 =ing 500ish gig array give me this and the avverage is double for my mobo.

    [​IMG]
  14. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    Looks pretty good. Do you recon the stripe size in the raid affects performance a heap?
    My stripes are 120kb Im pretty sure (or maybe 64, meh) it was the default size.
  15. DRDNA

    DRDNA

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,778 (1.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    566
    Location:
    New York
    mine is the default as well:toast:
  16. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    Is it possible to change the stripe size? Or would that require a format...
    Id like to experiment with different sizes
  17. DRDNA

    DRDNA

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,778 (1.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    566
    Location:
    New York
    it would require a full reformat and not the quick option either:eek:
  18. Chewy

    Chewy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,289 (1.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    148
    Location:
    Halifax, Canada
    I got 32bkb stripe size, it depends on the avg file in your system like if you want a little boost in gaming performance use smaller if the files you use alot are bigger (movies?) use a larger stripe size... I dont see it making a huge differnce though.

    If you ahve the option you can disable some cache and stuff listed in the vista tweaks thread.. my raid controller does not let me do that though.. but the one prob with doing that is if you dont have a back-up power supply and your houses power fails you lose all your data and have to reformat.. so to do it you should have a battery back-up power supply.

    I guess disabling that thing gave some people a nice performance gain, but its not guaranteed to,
  19. DRDNA

    DRDNA

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,778 (1.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    566
    Location:
    New York
    Or you may be able to ghost over the array to a big enough single then reformatt using desired stripe size then ghost the drive back from the single on to the newly striped array... I am certain i have done this in the past.
  20. mas0n New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    88 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Location:
    dallas
    ex_reven

    You have a bottleneck somewhere, there is no way you have a consistent read speed across the first 450GB of that array.
  21. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    7,689 (2.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,611
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    Ex, did you pull the jumpers for SATA2 mode? Judging from burst speed you did, but I know on my 'Cuda, I had to remove a jumper that sets the HDD to SATA 1 as default. Just a thought, but I think it's a wasted thought considering your speed. It's still damn fast.
  22. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    Do you mean how it doesnt vary alot? Why would that be impossible? (Theyr fairly new drives and they only ever have about 50-60gb of space used at any one time if that makes a diff)

    Wasnt aware they had jumpers. Well I did think they had jumpers, but when i looked into my case the other day I saw what looked like a place for jumpers, but when I used my tweezers I couldnt seem to find any bridging piece that goes on the jumpers. Maybe if i took them out of my case I could have a better look, not atm though.
  23. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    7,689 (2.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,611
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    The jumpers are very, very small...very small..did I mention they are small? I had to use a small pick to get it out! I lost it immediately! That may help you. My performance increased a little, mostly my burst which went from about 120MB/s to 255MB/s. My overall increased a few MB/s. I wish I could get more out of it, but I don't think there's really anything I can do, I have a partition for Windows Vista that's approx 20GB, and then the second partition for programs/games/downloads, etc. I may get another and go raid someday, but 500GB is sufficient for me ATM. :toast:
  24. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    [​IMG]

    I feel so clean lol...Im gonna defrag and rerun the test :roll:
  25. mas0n New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    88 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    Location:
    dallas
    If you are not sufferring from a bottleneck the results in HD Tach should always follow an arc. This is because the entire disk is read from start (outside) to finish (inside) and the outside tracks will always read faster because they are spinning at a higher rate of speed than the inner tracks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page