• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

HD comparison

zCypher

zCypher

Diamond Member
Just ran HD Tach 2.61 to compare a drive I brought home today.

My old drive : 20GB 7200rpm 2MB Quantum - several years old
New drive: 80GB 7200rpm 2MB Seagate - bought today

Seagate got 80+MB/s burst, 45MB/s average transfer, and 15+ms seek & 30+ CPU usage
Quantum got 60.2MB/s burst, 25MB/s average transfer and 11ms seek & only 20% CPU usage

Any idea why the Quantum has lower seek and CPU usage, but is slower, where the Seagate has assleaking seek time and hefty cpu usage? why? both HDs are on the same cable.

 
The old Quantum 7200RPM ATA drives have the fastest access time of any ATA drives ever released. Access time is only part of the performance equation so lower access doesn't guarantee better performance. The HDTach CPU usage is not very accurate, just ignore it.
 
80gb vs 20gb should be at least 4 times faster in transfer rate due to its density. Access time alone is not enought to justify performance. If everything seem faster for you at 80gb why bother comparing, LOL. I believe your 20gb should go out the windows ASAP due to it low capacity. The standard these day, IMO is 120gb?
 
When my 80GB 8MB arrives, I'll use my 80GB 8MB as boot and the 80GB 2MB as storage, and the 20GB will be donated to a friend. 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top