Need help from every user in this forum.

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

I'm starting a database for HD tach stats. Single drives only. 32MB test. This will be used for people wanting to short stroke their drive(s) for RAID, but don't know where the sweet spot is. If I can get a screen shot of everyone's drives, we can get a smoking database going. You need to include the chipset used, as this could make a difference.

EDIT: Plus the Interface too.

Please save them as JPG's and use this format in the file name (please):

MODEL------------------CHIPSET--USER
HDS721010KLA-GKAO-780i SLI-MrAlpha.JPG

Thanks for your help in this matter!

Joe

I.M.O.G. · Dec 4, 2009

Is this all you need Joe?

1. Screenshot showing hdtach results
2. Chipset used

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

I.M.O.G. said:
Is this all you need Joe?

1. Screenshot showing hdtach results
2. Chipset used

3. INTERFACE USED on drive (SAS, SATA, IDE) <-EDIT

Correct.! Very simple! MUST be 32MB test.

I'll determine the sweet spot, so the data in conclusive...

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

Here are a few examples

First drive is a 40gig IDE, the second is a 300 gig VelociRaptor

Daddyjaxx · Dec 4, 2009

Intel ICH10R SATA...hope you don't mind SSD. They are used in RAID too. WTH is mine so up and down?

EarthDog · Dec 4, 2009

This may help in being more specific to the already sufficiently encompassing advice - "smallest partition at the begining of the drive you can have with your space requirements".

I would be even more interested in the quantatative results of partitioning it a bit outside this "sweet spot" to see if its something any would notice (meaning boot times, game loads etc)

I will post up some numbers on my system when I get home

.

@ Daddyjax -One thing to note. HDTach is not very accurate at all with SSD's last I checked (ATTO, Crystal Disk Mark 2.2, etc are best but that wont show the results you are looking for here). Is that still correct? Have they updated it to work? If it hasnt, then those results may be skewed b/c of that bench on SSD's...

the most disturbing subject is the inconsistency between test tools. One version of ATTO Disk Benchmark can record result different from another, while HD-Tach gives different results on the same version and driver. Please read more to learn of the pitfalls and perils when testing SSD's between platforms.

Well, damn. All these years I've been testing SSD products with HD Tach, and now I'm beginning to see that maybe I should have paid closer attention to the name of the software. It appears that HD Tach is prone to reporting test anomalies, and SSD performance is not only affected by the controller in HD Tach, but also the amounts of system memory and the internal cache of the SSD. Lesson learned.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=270&Itemid=38

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

Daddyjaxx said:
Intel ICH10R SATA...hope you don't mind SSD. They are used in RAID too. WTH is mine so up and down?

LOL, yeah... I can see that SSD's are not going to be good for this...

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

EarthDog said:
This may help in being more specific to the already sufficiently encompassing advice - "smallest partition at the begining of the drive you can have with your space requirements".

I would be even more interested in the quantatative results of partitioning it a bit outside this "sweet spot" to see if its something any would notice (meaning boot times, game loads etc)

I will post up some numbers on my system when I get home .

This database would give you a starting point. Going past "MY" sweet spot, may yield the same results. Its for people who just want the answers, and want to get their system up and running without doing this part first. Its a time consuming process, however will be very valuable for everyone.

Daddyjaxx · Dec 4, 2009

How's a couple of crappy Seagate 1.5 TB on the same chipset. Doesn't surprise me about SSD's and HD Tach. The program won't run on 7 unless in compatability mode. SSD's were probably just either science fiction or for the very wealthy when the program was written.:

Wow...look at the lousy access times:

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

Daddyjaxx said:
How's a couple of crappy Seagate 1.5 TB on the same chipset. Doesn't surprise me about SSD's and HD Tach. The program won't run on 7 unless in compatability mode. SSD's were probably just either science fiction or for the very wealthy when the program was written.:

Wow...look at the lousy access times:

But if you wanted to do RAID, and short stroke those puppies, you would see a world of difference! If you're booting off of this drive, I would have made a 100gig partition, then used the remainder for your programs / games.

I'm going to post an example...shortly

RollingThunder · Dec 4, 2009

Joeteck said:
I'm starting a database for HD tach stats. Single drives only. 32MB test. This will be used for people wanting to short stroke their drive(s) for RAID, but don't know where the sweet spot is. If I can get a screen shot of everyone's drives, we can get a smoking database going. You need to include the chipset used, as this could make a difference.

EDIT: Plus the Interface too.

Thanks for your help in this matter!

Joe

Joe,

Will the operating system make a difference?

Daddyjaxx · Dec 4, 2009

Can't create RAID in the Intel setup program for 2 x 1.5 GB drives without losing a TB. It can only be created in Windows for data only.

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

Daddyjaxx said:
Can't create RAID in the Intel setup program for 2 x 1.5 GB drives without losing a TB. It can only be created in Windows for data only.

This can be done.... Without re-installing.

Just will need to do a few steps, but we can do it.

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

RollingThunder said:
Joe,

Will the operating system make a difference?

I'm not 100% sure... I've never seen any speed changes. between Oses, but anything is possible. I'm sure we will get duplicate info, with different operating system, and then we would have our answer... lol

Daddyjaxx · Dec 4, 2009

Now that you mention that, I do remember reading about that and getting past the 2 GB barrier. My OS is on the SSD anyway with programs and data on the 1.5 TB's. I used to have the drives in RAID, but ACRONIS couldn't see them because of the 2 TB limit.

chawks2 · Dec 4, 2009

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

Ok, here we go.

Now this is just an example. I really doubt someone would use four 80 gig drives in RAID 0, but you have to see how well it scales... Many of you may think is an SSD... lol, aside from the access time of course..

I'm going to post 4 screen shots. First one will to find out what the sweet spot is of the 80gig SATA drive.

The sweet spot is 15gig.

The second will be two of them in RAID 0 (30gig partition)
The third will be three in RAID 0 (45gig partition)
The forth will be four in RAID 0 (60 gig partition)

Access times got faster up to the 3rd drive, then fell slightly off when I added a fourth...

Joeteck · Dec 4, 2009

The screen shots.

EarthDog · Dec 4, 2009

Heh, HD Tach wont install on W764 for some reason...Says it needs XP or W2k...

EDIT: Forget it, compatability mode seems to work.. results tonight..

visbits · Dec 4, 2009

This is cool and all but wouldn't it be more useful in a searchable website form? That's going to be a bunch of unorganized content in this thread. :salute:

** Need help from every user in this forum. **

Retired

Glorious Leader

Retired

Retired

Attachments

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Retired

Retired

Member

Retired

Destroyer of Trolls & Spammers

Member

Retired

Retired

Member

Member

Retired

Retired

Attachments

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Member

Similar threads

Need help from every user in this forum.