• 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.

I bought 2 of these Seagate NCQ SATA IIs...

T

TheNiceGuy

Golden Member
I am building a new game system based on an A8N-SLI. I purchased 2 of theseText. I want 2 drives so if my OS/program drive crashes, I still have my data drive.
I just read a coup[le of things. Are they true? In SATA II RAID 0, if one drive crashes, they both do. NCQ decreases non-server performance.
So should I disable both of these features? Are these now worse than cheaper Seagates?
 
First of all, HDDs can fail at any time. If i were in your shoes, which I somewhat am, always back up your data. I have my data backed up on 2x120WD which i dont use, a 160GB Maxtor which i am soon to not use, and my new 400GB seagate, along with DVD-R. Yes it is timeconsuming. However, using older HDDs that are functional, but too slow, or too small is a great way to back stuff up. DVD-R is your next new friend.

You should probably read more about what performance advantages RAID has to offer. I do not benefit enough from any RAID solution to justify its cost, so I do not use RAID.
 
For a personal pc, raid is probably a waste of money.
Most users can backup the stuff they actually want on a single cd-rom.
For those with huge mp3 collections a dvd should still hold the majority of all users wanted data.

And a complete re-install of the windows OS once it has been up for 6 months usually nets about a 10% performance gain due to all the nonsense that gets installed and partially uninstalled if at all over time.

Those raptor drives are really fast but the difference is hardly noticeable unless you are moving form older technology.
The 7200 rpm 8 mb buffer drives are fairly good right with large storage sizes.

For a small business the raid 1 where you have two mirrored drives makes a lot of sense. If you can write it off against taxes than a full raid 5 with 6 SCSI drives would be optimal.
 
http://www.seagate.com/content..._intc-stx_sata_ncq.pdf

http://www.tech-report.com/rev...7200.7ncq/index.x?pg=1

After reading both of those yes, I would turn off NCQ for now. It seems the translation through the controller is slowing it down.

I'd also run them as 2 seperate drive for a total of 240 gigs of data and back up my needed files to DVD by category, i.e. one dvd for pictures, 1 for website/s, 1 or 2 for mp3s, 1 for useful apps I had downloaded.

The raid 0 approach will offer a slight overall increase in times but not much.
 
I already ordered the drives, then stumbled on some info like you mentioned.
My plan is to have one drive for the OS and programs (apps, games), and another for data (lots of movies, music, and unistalled programs). That way I can reformat the OS/Program drive occasionaly, without having to reinstall all the data. Of course, I will have DVDs of critical data.
Sound like a good plan?
The reason I am now shying away from RAID/NCQ is that I don't want to have to reformat the data drive everytime I do so with the OS drive. I also don't want any hits to game performance, which will be my main performance need.
Any advice?

BTW: right now I just have one UATA 120GB drive with everything on it!
 
Originally posted by: jterrell
http://www.seagate.com/content..._intc-stx_sata_ncq.pdf

http://www.tech-report.com/rev...7200.7ncq/index.x?pg=1

After reading both of those yes, I would turn off NCQ for now. It seems the translation through the controller is slowing it down.

I'd also run them as 2 seperate drive for a total of 240 gigs of data and back up my needed files to DVD by category, i.e. one dvd for pictures, 1 for website/s, 1 or 2 for mp3s, 1 for useful apps I had downloaded.

The raid 0 approach will offer a slight overall increase in times but not much.
Click to expand...


Verbage from the tech-report review:

"Unfortunately, IOMeter is about the only place where NCQ seems to help the Barracuda 7200.7. In fact, command queuing actually hurts the drive's performance in typical single-user applications, sometimes by a significant margin. Trying to pin down why NCQ slows the Barracuda down in some tests is more difficult, although the Raptor with TCQ is also plagued by poor single-user performance, so overhead associated with the Promise FastTrak TX 4200 controller may be the culprit.

At the end of the day, Native Command Queuing is undoubtedly The Right Thing to do. It's clearly a winner for servers that face multi-user loads, but the implementations we tested need to mature before they become attractive alternatives for single-user desktops. Given that it's entrenched in the Serial ATA II spec, we'll be seeing a lot more of Native Command Queuing moving forward. I can only hope that the next generation of drives and SATA controllers will, across the board, at least be no slower with NCQ than they are without."


Lets get a reliable review. This reviewer is obviousy pointing to his controller card as being the issue and not the drive. I think with motherboards that have native support of NCQ we are going to see much better results so don't panic TheNiceGuy. I lso purchased the same drive as you and am building my SLI system as we speak. I should have it completed this weekend and will let you know how it goes.



 
I wonder if the SATA II drives (NCQ), whose NCQ is disabled will perform at least as well as the Barracuda SATA I drives (non-NCQ). The newer SATA II drives are only $2 more at Newegg and are probably a bit more future-proof.
 
Cheers guys- I feel better now!
FF- I am still waiting on my parts to arrive. Let me know how your build goes. 🙂

BTW: can I format (as above) with a RAID/NCQ setup?
 
Did anyone here consider reccomending a 3ware escallade SATA controller? They can increase hard drive performance by up to 50%!
 
Originally posted by: Googer
Did anyone here consider reccomending a 3ware escallade SATA controller? They can increase hard drive performance by up to 50%!
Click to expand...
I didn't see that... Got a link? 😀

 
Originally posted by: Googer
Adding a controller can always improve performance for any drive old or new.

http://froogle.google.com/froo...mp;btnG=Search+Froogle


Here is my recommendation:
http://www.3ware.com/products/serial_ata9000.asp


Just check out the first few links that pop up under a google search for 3ware, most are reviews.



Just make sure that any controller you buy has a dedcated processor and ram(32-512mb). For small apps 32-64mb should do the job.
Click to expand...

One small problem, those are all 64bit 33mghz pci cards. No desktop motherboard has a slot for one of them.
 
64bit or not...
Increasing "hard drive performance by up to 50%" is a Mega-Huge claim. :shocked:
Someone making that specific claim should have some sort of link to back it up... other than a simple Google search. :laugh:

 
Originally posted by: jterrell
For a personal pc, raid is probably a waste of money.
Most users can backup the stuff they actually want on a single cd-rom.
For those with huge mp3 collections a dvd should still hold the majority of all users wanted data.

And a complete re-install of the windows OS once it has been up for 6 months usually nets about a 10% performance gain due to all the nonsense that gets installed and partially uninstalled if at all over time.

Those raptor drives are really fast but the difference is hardly noticeable unless you are moving form older technology.
The 7200 rpm 8 mb buffer drives are fairly good right with large storage sizes.

For a small business the raid 1 where you have two mirrored drives makes a lot of sense. If you can write it off against taxes than a full raid 5 with 6 SCSI drives would be optimal.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said except for the comment about Raptors. I went from a Western Digital WD400JB hd (40gb 8mb cache). It wasn't a large drive, but it was only 1.5 years old, and wasn't exactly "old technology". The difference between my Raptor and the WD400JB was very noticeable. My computer boots up much faster and applications feel like they load almost instantly, whereas they took a second or two on the WD400JB. Yea, sure, a few seconds may not seem like much, but the difference between waiting a moment vs. instant response is very nice 🙂
 
Originally posted by: Gerbil333
Originally posted by: jterrell
For a personal pc, raid is probably a waste of money.
Most users can backup the stuff they actually want on a single cd-rom.
For those with huge mp3 collections a dvd should still hold the majority of all users wanted data.

And a complete re-install of the windows OS once it has been up for 6 months usually nets about a 10% performance gain due to all the nonsense that gets installed and partially uninstalled if at all over time.

Those raptor drives are really fast but the difference is hardly noticeable unless you are moving form older technology.
The 7200 rpm 8 mb buffer drives are fairly good right with large storage sizes.

For a small business the raid 1 where you have two mirrored drives makes a lot of sense. If you can write it off against taxes than a full raid 5 with 6 SCSI drives would be optimal.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said except for the comment about Raptors. I went from a Western Digital WD400JB hd (40gb 8mb cache). It wasn't a large drive, but it was only 1.5 years old, and wasn't exactly "old technology". The difference between my Raptor and the WD400JB was very noticeable. My computer boots up much faster and applications feel like they load almost instantly, whereas they took a second or two on the WD400JB. Yea, sure, a few seconds may not seem like much, but the difference between waiting a moment vs. instant response is very nice 🙂
Click to expand...

40gb drives were pretty low-end even 1.5 yrs ago, even if they were sold back then (new). Try comparing similar price drives TODAY. You would have had as good a performance increase if you spent the money you did on a Raptor for a 300GB drive instead.
 
Originally posted by: Blain
64bit or not...
Increasing "hard drive performance by up to 50%" is a Mega-Huge claim. :shocked:
Someone making that specific claim should have some sort of link to back it up... other than a simple Google search. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Dude, did you read I said when I will get it later. It was 6am I had to go to work. It is a well know fact for as long as there have been PC's, that using a 3rd party controller can Increase performace of an existing drive. Especially when compaierd to the intergrated southbridge controller.
 
Originally posted by: Blain
64bit or not...
Increasing "hard drive performance by up to 50%" is a Mega-Huge claim. :shocked:
Someone making that specific claim should have some sort of link to back it up... other than a simple Google search. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Dude, did you read I said when I will get it later, 6am I had to go to work. It has been a well know fact since the dawn of the PC that a drive controller can Impact the performace of a drive. Especially when compaierd to an intergrated southbridge controller
Iintergrated controllers offer sub par performance, but are cheap. It explains why very few desktop users ever buy them any more for primary storage. And is also the reaon why IDE is so succesful and SCSI is rarely seen in the home. Long Live SCSI!


Sorry for doubble post, my mistake. I thought i accidentaly closed the wrong browser window.
 
Rocket Drives are nice, but will plug up the pci bus and bring other devices to their knees. A better option is to use existing motherboard ATA/eIDE that has its own "separate path" that is not tied to pci. A product called Hyperdrive is the answer, here is a link to the forum

http://www.hyperosforum.co.uk/hosf/index.php
 
RAID 0 is a misnomer since the acronym is Redundant Array o' Inexpensive Disks and the configuration defined by "0" is the opposite of, un- or anti-redundant, being more prone to failure than without.

Anyhoo, for simple data security and quick recovery I recommend using two drives but with one as a removeable backup clone. Use at least one partition for OS and proggies together (no point in seperating since latter depends upon the registry and various files located with the former) and one for mass storage of movies, muzak, games etc. The OS partition can then be imaged to DVD more frequently than the whole HDD is cloned. Works for me.
 

Muzak? HUH?



I have felt for a while that RAID 0 should be called AID: "Array of Independant Disks", and well the acronym fits because one drive provides AID to the other.

Providing AID to another in a team effort, gets more done. It kind of naturaly fits. We should change the Name RAID 0 to this (AID).

here is another acornym for T.E.A.M.

T ogheter
E veryone
A ccomplishes
M ore
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top