Hard Drive Benchmarks - What's Hot & What's Not...Poll Added

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
Toms Hardware has a great chart that seems to follow what we have been finding here. You can find it here.

This should be valuable information for all of us who want the most for the least. You can download HD Tune here.

All tests should have indexing turned off and please mention Basic System configuration and OS.

WD 6400AAKS on Abit IP35-E / 3.4 GHz / 4 GB DDR2-800 / WinXP
Looks very simular to the 320 without the high latency.

WD 3200AAKS on Abit IP35-E / 3.4 Ghz / 4 GB DDR2-800 / Win Xp
The 320 has some serious spikes (buffer overflow?) Other then that it's really nice excluding the access time. Snappy Drive.

Seagate 32500820AS on DFI Expert / 2.4 Ghz / 2 GB PC3500 / Win Xp
Less then 1 year old w/8MB Cache. Another midrange drive. Seems Sluggish.

WD 1600JS on Abit IP35-E / 3.4 Ghz / 4 GB DDR2-800 / Win Xp
8 MB Cache...This was one of the drives from my old RAID. Runs Hot.

WD 1600JS (2xRAID 0) on DFI Expert / 2.4 Ghz / 2 GB PC3500 / Win Xp
In RAID these little WD's do pretty well. Shows what inexpensive drives can do with RAID on a desktop.

WD 2500JD on Abit IP35-E / 3.4 Ghz / 4 GB DDR2-800 / Win Xp
One of my older "Storage" Drives.
 
T

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
Fullmetal Chocobo

Fullmetal Chocobo

Moderator<br>Distributed Computing
Moderator
May 13, 2003
13,704
7
81
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Originally posted by: Fullmetal Chocobo
System config;
2gb PC2-900 DDR2, Asus P5N32-E SLI Plus mobo, Intel E6400, BFG Tech 8800GTS (640mb), Areca ARC-1220 RAID controller, etc.

74gb Raptor on Asus P5N32-E SLI Plus

2x150gb Raptors in RAID 0 on Areca ARC-1220

4x400gb WD RE2 in RAID 5 on Areca ARC-1220

These are a bit out-dated--I'll redo my benchmarks and edit tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I'll assume your raptor is the older 8MB cache? I do miss my RAID!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure actually. It's pulled out of my system now. I changed up my config to get ready for the file server I'm doing... The two 150gb Raptors are plugged into the mboo now, the 74gb Raptor is pulled, and the now 5-disk RAID is going to be put into another machine.
 
T

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
Originally posted by: Fullmetal Chocobo
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Originally posted by: Fullmetal Chocobo
System config;
2gb PC2-900 DDR2, Asus P5N32-E SLI Plus mobo, Intel E6400, BFG Tech 8800GTS (640mb), Areca ARC-1220 RAID controller, etc.

74gb Raptor on Asus P5N32-E SLI Plus

2x150gb Raptors in RAID 0 on Areca ARC-1220

4x400gb WD RE2 in RAID 5 on Areca ARC-1220

These are a bit out-dated--I'll redo my benchmarks and edit tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I'll assume your raptor is the older 8MB cache? I do miss my RAID!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure actually. It's pulled out of my system now. I changed up my config to get ready for the file server I'm doing... The two 150gb Raptors are plugged into the mboo now, the 74gb Raptor is pulled, and the now 5-disk RAID is going to be put into another machine.
Click to expand...


Anyway for you to do just one 150GB Raptor? That would make a nice benchmark.
 
Rubycon

Rubycon

Madame President
Aug 10, 2005
17,768
485
126
PE5WS Pro - QX9650 at 4GHz, 8GB DDR2-800, Areca ARC-1680 w/ 1.2GHz IOP and 2GB ECC DDR2-533 Cache. Full write back policy with battery backup. Six Fujitsu MAX 15K drives (147GB) RAID0 with 64KB Stripe size.

Text
 
T

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
Originally posted by: Rubycon
PE5WS Pro - QX9650 at 4GHz, 8GB DDR2-800, Areca ARC-1680 w/ 1.2GHz IOP and 2GB ECC DDR2-533 Cache. Full write back policy with battery backup. Six Fujitsu MAX 15K drives (147GB) RAID0 with 64KB Stripe size.

Text
Click to expand...

500 MB/sec....errr....uhmmm.....don't know what to say. Bet it's snappy:0
 
L

LOUISSSSS

Diamond Member
Dec 5, 2005
8,771
58
91
1 x 150gb Raptor

Avg: 67.8 MB/sec
Access Time: 8.8ms
Burst Rate: 58.3 MB/sec

test was done with system in my signature & running Folding @ Home 100% CPU Usage.
 
n7

n7

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2004
21,281
4
81
Originally posted by: Rubycon
PE5WS Pro - QX9650 at 4GHz, 8GB DDR2-800, Areca ARC-1680 w/ 1.2GHz IOP and 2GB ECC DDR2-533 Cache. Full write back policy with battery backup. Six Fujitsu MAX 15K drives (147GB) RAID0 with 64KB Stripe size.

Text
Click to expand...

Hax!!1! :Q


Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
1 x 150gb Raptor

Avg: 67.8 MB/sec
Access Time: 8.8ms
Burst Rate: 58.3 MB/sec

test was done with system in my signature & running Folding @ Home 100% CPU Usage.
Click to expand...

I think you got Average & Burst swapped around there ;)


 
n7

n7

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2004
21,281
4
81
Okay, a few from me.
All done on the Intel SATA ports excepting the 1 TB which was on JMicron.

DFI UT P35-T2R + Q6700 + 8 GB Mushkin 996580 (stock at this moment)

WD Raptor 150 GB WD1500ADFD-00NLR1
min - 50.9 MB/s
max - 84.9 MB/s
ave - 73.4 MB/s
access time - 8.2ms
burst rate - 99.2 MB/s

WD GreenPower 1 TB WD10EACS
min - 36.6 MB/s
max - 78.4 MB/s
ave - 60.8 MB/s
access time - 15.1ms
burst rate - 93.8 MB/s

Seagate 1 TB 7200.11
min - 51.6 MB/s
max - 109.6 MB/s
ave - 86.9 MB/s
access time - 12.8ms
burst rate - 101.4 MB/s

WD 500 GB KS
min - 25.2 MB/s
max - 72.0 MB/s
ave - 59.3 MB/s
access time - 13.5ms
burst rate - 107.3 MB/s

WD 500 GB AAKS
min - 40 MB/s
max - 87.9 MB/s
ave - 68.6 MB/s
access time - 19.2ms
burst rate - 102.4 MB/s

Seagate 500 GB 7200.10
min - 37.1 MB/s
max - 68.6 MB/s
ave - 59.8 MB/s
access time - 13.1ms
burst rate - 122.3 MB/s

And from my P5B Deluxe + E1200 Celery @ 3.2 GHz + 4 GB G.Skill PQ

Maxtor 500 GB Maxline Pro 7H500F0
min - 34.7 MB/s
max - 72.2 MB/s
ave - 56.6 MB/s
access time - 15.5ms
burst rate - 110.5 MB/s


There are a bunch more i could do but i'm lazy for now...maybe will add them later.
 
Rubycon

Rubycon

Madame President
Aug 10, 2005
17,768
485
126

Dual 2.66GHz Xeon (Prestonia), 2GB DDR2100, LSI MegaRAID 320-4X, (4) Fujitsu MAS 15k 36GB U320 SCA in RAID5.

Text

The STR seems pretty low (tests much higher with other programs) but the access time is right on. :)
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
All of those results fall short of the new 2x320GB platter drives, the 640 AAKS from WD:
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3269

And it is MUCH slower then the fastest drive on the market today...
http://www.ocztechnology.com/p...es/ocz_sata_ii_2_5-ssd

500$ for a 32GB drive might be a lot. But it is blazing fast, less then 0.1ms access speed. Infinitesimal power consumption and heat generation, and no noise at all whatsoever. (and insanely high reliability compared to motorized drives).

But if you are building with a budget, I would definitely go with the WD 640GB drive. It is 130$ and only second to the OCZ 500$ flash drive. And its got plenty of space.
 
Rubycon

Rubycon

Madame President
Aug 10, 2005
17,768
485
126
Originally posted by: taltamir
All of those results fall short of the new 2x320GB platter drives, the 640 AAKS from WD:
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3269
I would definitely go with the WD 640GB drive. It is 130$ and only second to the OCZ 500$ flash drive. And its got plenty of space.
Click to expand...

Not even close. As to using them - they are much quicker than any normal user would see as they are behind one of the fastest controllers on the market - ARC1680 SAS with 2GB cache. This host is also running an array of Fujitsu MAX SAS drives. The SAS drives will run complete circles around the WD640's as well as Raptors in i/o intense scenarios. The STR of the array is also far greater than any SSD. Random access within the cache is also in the sub ms access time. Text

When SAS SSD's are available in 128GB sizes I will be interested in this technology. :)
 
T

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
Originally posted by: taltamir
All of those results fall short of the new 2x320GB platter drives, the 640 AAKS from WD:
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3269

And it is MUCH slower then the fastest drive on the market today...
http://www.ocztechnology.com/p...es/ocz_sata_ii_2_5-ssd

500$ for a 32GB drive might be a lot. But it is blazing fast, less then 0.1ms access speed. Infinitesimal power consumption and heat generation, and no noise at all whatsoever. (and insanely high reliability compared to motorized drives).

But if you are building with a budget, I would definitely go with the WD 640GB drive. It is 130$ and only second to the OCZ 500$ flash drive. And its got plenty of space.
Click to expand...

What this thread is trying to do is post Real World Statistics from users machines, not what anand or tom or any other site does with their benches. Real drives that we buy and use, not $1000 ssd drives.

As for real world usage, SAS is currently at the top of the food chain and as Rubycon mentioned, these are blazing fast systems (although pricy) that will slap the sillyness off any current solution.

If you would like to post what you are currently running so that we can all benefit from it, great.....
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
I am running a 74GB raptor, the GD model (ADFD is slightly faster, so what :p). and for storage RAID1 500GB and a RAID1 750GB array built using WD Caviar SE16, and I have ordered (yesturday) 5x750GB Caviar GP and parts to build a ZFS server. (after which I will sell the 500 and 750GB drives I currently use)
I see no reason to upgrade my raptor really, the benefits are minor and the cost is high. If I did replace it now, it will be with a 640GB (2 platter) WD drive.

I am considering jury rigging my own SSD drive for the OS drive on the server, using an IDE convertor. But most likely I will just wait until the next gen of SSD drives. I would be all over that 64GB SSD from OCZ if it cost 200$. Which I expect it will in a year or two. I would have also gotten it if I was rich
 
N

NYHoustonman

Platinum Member
Dec 8, 2002
2,642
0
0
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Updated original with 6400AAKS.
Click to expand...

Linkie no workie :(.

I just ordered one of these to replace my current Caviar SE 250GB (don't know the model number offhand, I'm at work)... will I see anything noticeable?

EDIT- works now... damn O.O
 
pugh

pugh

Senior member
Sep 8, 2000
733
10
81
I can only speak for me. But man I will tell you, I noticed a hueg increase in programs being snappier opening and my load times on maps in TF2 seems to have speed up to where Im one of the early ones on the next map. I'm running RAID5 if that matters. I upgrading from a seagate 400gb 16mb cache
 
T

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
Originally posted by: NYHoustonman
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Updated original with 6400AAKS.
Click to expand...

Linkie no workie :(.

I just ordered one of these to replace my current Caviar SE 250GB (don't know the model number offhand, I'm at work)... will I see anything noticeable?

EDIT- works now... damn O.O
Click to expand...

I came from a 74GB Raptor, then on to the WD 160JS RAID1, but with my new board I don't have a RAID option so I went for the WD 3200AAKS which didn't feel as fast as my RAID, and now I have the 6400AAKS and it is noticably snappier then anything I've had yet. I even created a smaller (175GB) boot partition just to keep the heads on the fastest part of the platter, and used the rest for storage. I wish I could have two of these in RAID 1....sigh
 
N

NYHoustonman

Platinum Member
Dec 8, 2002
2,642
0
0
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Originally posted by: NYHoustonman
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Updated original with 6400AAKS.
Click to expand...

Linkie no workie :(.

I just ordered one of these to replace my current Caviar SE 250GB (don't know the model number offhand, I'm at work)... will I see anything noticeable?

EDIT- works now... damn O.O
Click to expand...

I came from a 74GB Raptor, then on to the WD 160JS RAID1, but with my new board I don't have a RAID option so I went for the WD 3200AAKS which didn't feel as fast as my RAID, and now I have the 6400AAKS and it is noticably snappier then anything I've had yet. I even created a smaller (175GB) boot partition just to keep the heads on the fastest part of the platter, and used the rest for storage. I wish I could have two of these in RAID 1....sigh
Click to expand...

Heh, I never thought I'd be hyped for a new hard drive like this XD. Gets here next week, and I can't wait.

Thanks for the thread, it provided a lot of information for me.
 
T

Tweakin

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2000
2,532
0
71
Originally posted by: NYHoustonman
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Originally posted by: NYHoustonman
Originally posted by: Tweakin
Updated original with 6400AAKS.
Click to expand...

Linkie no workie :(.

I just ordered one of these to replace my current Caviar SE 250GB (don't know the model number offhand, I'm at work)... will I see anything noticeable?

EDIT- works now... damn O.O
Click to expand...

I came from a 74GB Raptor, then on to the WD 160JS RAID1, but with my new board I don't have a RAID option so I went for the WD 3200AAKS which didn't feel as fast as my RAID, and now I have the 6400AAKS and it is noticably snappier then anything I've had yet. I even created a smaller (175GB) boot partition just to keep the heads on the fastest part of the platter, and used the rest for storage. I wish I could have two of these in RAID 1....sigh
Click to expand...

Heh, I never thought I'd be hyped for a new hard drive like this XD. Gets here next week, and I can't wait.

Thanks for the thread, it provided a lot of information for me.
Click to expand...

That was the intent...
 
lopri

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,314
690
126
Everest also has hard disk bench. It's a small and quick test but I find it very repeatable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom