Need help from every user in this forum.

Joeteck · Dec 6, 2009

Neuromancer said:
Only short stroke if you DO NOT make a second partition. In which case you should recommend shooting for the "second sweet spot" as the minimum for desktop usage. For benching, the smaller the better.

Once a second partition is added, your OS will try and use it for temp install files and stuff, and any time it gets accessed your primary partition is going to take a ****.

Still.

Love the idea of finding if there is a specific percentage I would upload mine, but they are TERRIBLE since both drives on this PC are approaching 90% full.

Actually, it would be cool to see if the amount of data (90% full) would make a difference in benchmarking... I don't think it will..

Neuromancer · Dec 6, 2009

Cant run HDtach on Vista64

TechJunky · Dec 6, 2009

Western Digital 500GB with Intel(R) G33/G31/P35/P31 Express Chipset.

freeagent · Dec 6, 2009

Neuro, you have to run it in compatibility mode :thup:

Joeteck · Dec 7, 2009

Looking good guys!

I.M.O.G. · Dec 7, 2009

You should write up something short for the frontpage, requesting more data for a future article - maybe readers will send you some stuff. If you do so, you should accept email submissions as well as these forum posts.

Joeteck · Dec 7, 2009

I.M.O.G. said:
You should write up something short for the frontpage, requesting more data for a future article - maybe readers will send you some stuff. If you do so, you should accept email submissions as well as these forum posts.

Ok, will do!

Old Thrashbarg · Dec 7, 2009

Actually, it would be cool to see if the amount of data (90% full) would make a difference in benchmarking... I don't think it will..

I would highly doubt it, since I don't believe the test uses any of the data actually on the drive. Wait a little bit and I can test it, though... my 640gb is almost exactly 90% full, and I have room on one of my other drives to move stuff off it. I can try, maybe, 50% full and completely empty, and compare it to the data I posted earlier. If you want, anyway... I won't go to the trouble unless you really want to know, since it takes awhile to move 500+GB of stuff.

Joeteck · Dec 7, 2009

Old Thrashbarg said:
I would highly doubt it, since I don't believe the test uses any of the data actually on the drive. Wait a little bit and I can test it, though... my 640gb is almost exactly 90% full, and I have room on one of my other drives to move stuff off it. I can try, maybe, 50% full and completely empty, and compare it to the data I posted earlier. If you want, anyway... I won't go to the trouble unless you really want to know, since it takes awhile to move 500+GB of stuff.

They only way to know is to try...

Old Thrashbarg · Dec 7, 2009

Alright then, I'll start moving files and post back later this evening with the results.

Edit: OK, update. The verdict is... drumroll, please... :shock:

...bupkis. The amount of data on the drive makes absolutely no difference whatsoever. I tried it at half full and then completely empty, ran the test twice for each, and all I got were the usual miniscule variations each time the test is run. I have screenshots saved if you really want 'em, but they don't show anything interesting.

Anyhow, that settles that. I'd been kinda meaning to clean off that drive anyway, so I can re-partition it as a boot drive. So it wasn't a total wasted effort.

freeagent · Dec 8, 2009

Ok, I added a 3rd raptor to the mix. My total size with 3 drives is 419.2gb I took that number, and divided it by 6, wich gave me 69.86gb for my windows slice, and 349.something for my storage slice, wich I install my games to.

Results :thup:

Joeteck · Dec 8, 2009

freeagent said:
Ok, I added a 3rd raptor to the mix. My total size with 3 drives is 419.2gb I took that number, and divided it by 6, wich gave me 69.86gb for my windows slice, and 349.something for my storage slice, wich I install my games to.

Results

very very NICE! Good work... did you make one monster partition and then sliced it that way, or did you make a 69gig RAID slice in your RAID BIOS, and then made another RAID 0 with the remainder?

FYI: to find the formatted capacity of any drive, take the advertised size and multiply it by .932

freeagent · Dec 8, 2009

Joeteck said:
very very NICE! Good work... did you make one monster partition and then sliced it that way, or did you make a 69gig RAID slice in your RAID BIOS, and then made another RAID 0 with the remainder?

FYI: to find the formatted capacity of any drive, take the advertised size and multiply it by .932

Thanks. No I make all partitions useing the raid bios

There is a point of diminishing returns tho.. Useing an odd number like 9 I think is when it starts to choke, and definately with 11 heheh.

Joeteck · Dec 8, 2009

freeagent said:
Thanks. No I make all partitions useing the raid bios

There is a point of diminishing returns tho.. Useing an odd number like 9 I think is when it starts to choke, and definately with 11 heheh.

The intel Matrix RAID can only do 6... Unless you're using a dedicated RAID card with 8 or more.... JEEZ!

Imagine 8 300 gig VRaptors... in RAID 0, Now that's a dream for ya..!

freeagent · Dec 8, 2009

Sorry, I should have been more clear with my post, I must have been asleep at the wheel or something! I meant takeing the total size of your drives, according to the matrix manager, and divideing that number by an odd number like 9 or 11 and you would see some chokeing going on, sorry!

Theres gotta be someone out there thats hardcore enough to have 6 or 7 vraps, come you can show yourself

Joeteck · Dec 8, 2009

freeagent said:
Sorry, I should have been more clear with my post, I must have been asleep at the wheel or something! I meant takeing the total size of your drives, according to the matrix manager, and divideing that number by an odd number like 9 or 11 and you would see some chokeing going on, sorry!

Theres gotta be someone out there thats hardcore enough to have 6 or 7 vraps, come you can show yourself

I don't use the divider method. I look at the actual HD tach image to determine the best short stroke location. However, 6 seems to work very well, for 3 drives.

5 for 2 drive, 6 for 3, 7 for 4 and so on?

freeagent · Dec 8, 2009

I used to do that too, until I got the bright idea to take the mathematical approach. Your way is a good to do it if you arent sure what the drives are capable of, when they are new (to you) :thup:

BTW I suck at math

EarthDog · Dec 8, 2009

Here are my results... I never thought my raptorX was so slow... wow. That almost seems anomalous to me (if i didint see FA's results). Anyway, here they are RaptorX 150GB 16mb cache and WD Caviar Black 640GB.

Joeteck · Dec 8, 2009

those 640gig blacks kick some arse!!! I would love three of those puppies in RAID 0...

CoolEye · Dec 9, 2009

Samsung Spinpoint F1 750GB - SATA

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

Retired

Member

Member

Member

Retired

Glorious Leader

Retired

Member

Retired

Member

Member

Retired

Member

Retired

Member

Retired

Member

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner

Attachments

Retired

Registered

Similar threads

Need help from every user in this forum.