-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Seagate Firmware Performance Differences ! New buyers beware !
- Thread starter bing
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Location
- in a magical field
I had mentioned an oddity of large difference between benchmarks which are normally consistent a while ago. HDTune and HDTach gave much different results. I don't know exactly how they test and that may be part of it, people seem to favor HDTune now. I also don't know what the settings in ATTO mean.
NOTE These results should probably be ignored, this was on a split partition drive with 3AAJ firmware that has an OS and storage partition. I didn't defrag it at all since it's a temp single drive setup. New blank disk 3AAJ results are in the second benchmark post below
Anyhow here they are:
HDTach looks normal, expected STR curve
HDTune is different than HDTach which is what I'd asked about before and similar to the 3.AAK results
ATTO is similar to HDTune
One other thing I noticed in the article Bing linked is the access time test results. They don' show the numbers but the AAK looks to have lower and tighter access time samples. The 3AAJ looks to be kind of a hybrid, with 3AAK-type STR and 3AAE-pattern access times
One other thing to note is the drives' controller boards are physically different. 3AAJ on the left with Agere controller chip, 3AAE on the right with ST chip:
I will run the same benchmarks on the 3AAE in a little bit here.
NOTE These results should probably be ignored, this was on a split partition drive with 3AAJ firmware that has an OS and storage partition. I didn't defrag it at all since it's a temp single drive setup. New blank disk 3AAJ results are in the second benchmark post below
Anyhow here they are:
HDTach looks normal, expected STR curve
HDTune is different than HDTach which is what I'd asked about before and similar to the 3.AAK results
ATTO is similar to HDTune
One other thing I noticed in the article Bing linked is the access time test results. They don' show the numbers but the AAK looks to have lower and tighter access time samples. The 3AAJ looks to be kind of a hybrid, with 3AAK-type STR and 3AAE-pattern access times
One other thing to note is the drives' controller boards are physically different. 3AAJ on the left with Agere controller chip, 3AAE on the right with ST chip:
I will run the same benchmarks on the 3AAE in a little bit here.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Location
- in a magical field
No idea what you'll get, I ordered a few drives around the same time but from different places and they were different firmwares.
Here's the same benches on the 3AAE. I am formatting another 3AAJ at this time because I'm not sure if the drive being blank makes a difference. There is something odd about how the AAJ performs in these though, it was a little wierd on the ICH8R on a P5B as well.
What is most bothersome to me is the random access time not the STR. STR is much less real-world for the majority of use. I'm going to run the same stuff on a blank AAJ and see if that matters. It's sometimes hard to know which drive you're testing in these programs though
blah, was gonna set up the RAID in the next day or two now I may just wait until I can get a reply from Seagate. That article said they were swapping the AAK firmware but alst time I talked to them they do NOT guarantee which you'll get as a replacement. I understand this in a certain way because I'm sure the RMA system is somewhat automated but there still has to be a person to pack the box If someone wants something specific that's still possible - still in production - we ought to have the option to delay the RMA if necessary.
Here's the same benches on the 3AAE. I am formatting another 3AAJ at this time because I'm not sure if the drive being blank makes a difference. There is something odd about how the AAJ performs in these though, it was a little wierd on the ICH8R on a P5B as well.
What is most bothersome to me is the random access time not the STR. STR is much less real-world for the majority of use. I'm going to run the same stuff on a blank AAJ and see if that matters. It's sometimes hard to know which drive you're testing in these programs though
blah, was gonna set up the RAID in the next day or two now I may just wait until I can get a reply from Seagate. That article said they were swapping the AAK firmware but alst time I talked to them they do NOT guarantee which you'll get as a replacement. I understand this in a certain way because I'm sure the RMA system is somewhat automated but there still has to be a person to pack the box If someone wants something specific that's still possible - still in production - we ought to have the option to delay the RMA if necessary.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2005
- Location
- Tau'ri
The can be checked using hdtune, looking at the label or booting up your computer to the POST page.
I have both in my PC (AAE and AAK) and I do not notice any differnce between them. They are both slower then expected
EDIT: Started drinking so no benches.. music and games tonight
altohugh I am wrong... I have a AAD and a AAK
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #26
Interesting and awaiting for your AAK result.
MM, suggestion, save that 3AAE result at the HDTach, once you done with AAK, you can bring it back the saved result and show them both on single Hdtach screen for better comparison on both slopes.
MM, suggestion, save that 3AAE result at the HDTach, once you done with AAK, you can bring it back the saved result and show them both on single Hdtach screen for better comparison on both slopes.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Location
- in a magical field
I don't have any AAK, just 1 AAE and 3 AAJ 500GB. The AAJ I used is currently my OS disk which is partitioned in to an 80GB and the rest as another partition. I am formatting another AAJ to test a single partition blank one.
Bing do you know if there's any difference in making them 'Dynamic disks' rather than 'Basic disks'?
Bing do you know if there's any difference in making them 'Dynamic disks' rather than 'Basic disks'?
- Thread Starter
- #28
Straight from the "source" -> Basic Storage Versus Dynamic Storage in Windows XP
-> Basic Storage Versus Dynamic Storage in Windows XP
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Location
- in a magical field
Yea I've seen the MS stuff but it only tells what they are not any advantages and disadvantages.
The sentences about basic disks not being able to be made in to some RAID volume types and this sentence "You cannot create mirrored volumes or RAID-5 volumes on Windows XP Home Edition, Windows XP Professional, or Windows XP 64-Bit Edition-based computers" confused me though. Are those talking about Windows software-based arrays only? Is there anything special to know for making a RAID0/RAID5 based upon this disk type info?
The sentences about basic disks not being able to be made in to some RAID volume types and this sentence "You cannot create mirrored volumes or RAID-5 volumes on Windows XP Home Edition, Windows XP Professional, or Windows XP 64-Bit Edition-based computers" confused me though. Are those talking about Windows software-based arrays only? Is there anything special to know for making a RAID0/RAID5 based upon this disk type info?
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
That is for a windows raid only, correct. It's not needed for a raid controller array. And there is no performance difference between basic and dynamic. There's basically no reason to convert to dynamic unless you need to do a software mirror, stripe, or raid 5.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Location
- in a magical field
Results for a freshly formatted blank 3AAJ drive which are a more equivalent comparison to post #24.
Random access time and burst rate are the same now. HDTach shows slightly lower STR, HDTune does as well. But interestingly theaverage speed is similar for HDTach you can see how the 3AAJ holds a higher rate farther into the drive. (nevermind that, was misreading the graphs) HDTune gets a lower average for the 3AAJ but again the curve stays at a higher rate longer. The read speeds in ATTO on the 3AAJs are worse for both the blank and used 3AAJ. 
I wonder if some of these results are odd artifacts of the way the bencharks work? I'd like to do some real-world stuff but kind of a pita tbh
Comments?
Random access time and burst rate are the same now. HDTach shows slightly lower STR, HDTune does as well. But interestingly the
I wonder if some of these results are odd artifacts of the way the bencharks work? I'd like to do some real-world stuff but kind of a pita tbh Comments?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Location
- Canada, Ottawa/Toronto
Here's an ATTO score for a 500 GIG AAK
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Location
- Canada, Ottawa/Toronto
This drive is new but seems to be defective, so any measurements are kinda pointless. None the less here they are.
The reason why this drive blows:
The reason why this drive blows:
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2006
My 4 500gb drives all happen to be AAK... I'll post some benchmarks tomorrow if I can get them working in 64bit vista.
Didn't have time to install my drive today . I didn't even have time to install a hard drive. How lame.
I should have time tomorrow depending on how class treats me.
I did, however, have time to call Seagate about this. Their CSR from the RMA department informed me that if the drive is not defective in some manner, they (Seagate) cannot replace/switch it for me. He did give me the number for their "technical" department, but they were closed. The CSR told me that the technical department would have information as to whether this firmware performance difference is a "known issue" or not, and further, whether Seagate can swap my drive for me outside of the warranty.
. I didn't even have time to install a hard drive. How lame. I should have time tomorrow depending on how class treats me.
I did, however, have time to call Seagate about this. Their CSR from the RMA department informed me that if the drive is not defective in some manner, they (Seagate) cannot replace/switch it for me. He did give me the number for their "technical" department, but they were closed. The CSR told me that the technical department would have information as to whether this firmware performance difference is a "known issue" or not, and further, whether Seagate can swap my drive for me outside of the warranty.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2003
I ordered 3 of these a while ago and 2 of them were defective, 2 in Raid was alright but I ended up going with a Raptor which in the end I was a lot more pleased with. I still have 1 as a backup and seems to be working alright but still kind of makes me feel iffy. In the end I didn't think much of raiding only 2 of these and the tech phone support was terrible but that is nothing new. It seems like you either get good a solid one or a flaky one...
Forgot to add they were all AAK's and I believe China too.
Forgot to add they were all AAK's and I believe China too.
Last edited:
Similar threads
