IC7 and low raptor score?

[Ph33zy]

According to sandra, my raptor is slower than a regular 7200 8 mb cache on my ic7. Anyone else noticing this?

 

[stevejst]

One year old technology can be as well slower than the new one. Seriously. The ultimate processor a year ago is just an average/mediocre processor today. The same with hard drives.

 

[Ph33zy]

i dont get your post? a raptor is newer than a 7200 8mb cache. A raptor runs at 10000 rpm's with an 8mb cache..

 

[jswjimmy]

its the fastest ata harddrive in the world

 

[stevejst]

I know what Raptor is. I also believe it should be faster than any 8 MB cache PATA. But I have also seen many surprisingly low real scores. Why, I don't know. You explain.

 

[jswjimmy]

maby its not on ata 150

 

[Ph33zy]

i think ata150 is only availble if its running in raid.. i only have 1 raptor.. =/

 

[infinite012]

What's the revision of your sandra?

 

[Mickey21]

I have two Raptors in RAID stripe on that same motherboard. Sandra reports crap on my RAID as well, but I have used other benchmarks to look at it again and again, and other benchmarks show my average transfer rate to be 108MB per second, which kills almost any other drive RAID I have have used. I would say try other benchmarks, I dont know why Sandra reports low scores for Raptors. You can see obviously that the drives move some data like nobody's business. One year old technology? What does that mean, or have to do with this. I mean Raptor drives rock, and no way are a year old. My 120GB drives or 200GB drives only pull around 42-55MB per second at best. 67MB/s with two 120's in a RAID IDE stripe. And my one year old 2.6 P4 kicks @ss still...

 

[User1001]

sandra reports my raptor fine.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Ph33zy
According to sandra, my raptor is slower than a regular 7200 8 mb cache on my ic7. Anyone else noticing this?

Don't go by PCMark's hard drive test... it's not a true test of the hard drive... changing the FSB speed and clock speed of the processor effect the HDD score in PCMark. If you want to know what it's physically capable of, use HDTach... and run it on a drive that's not formatted. That'll give you the true speed that it's phsyically capable of reading from the disk. I haven't run Sandra's HDD test on it... so I don't know what type of results it gives. You can use PCMark if you want... just look at the individual scores for the tests... not the final "synthetic score."

 

[Geomagick]

I have a raptor and an IC7-G, and I must admit I was rather taken aback by the sandra scores, however I must admit that in the real world looking at the time things take to load it is a lot quicker than anything I have experienced before including my old four drive RAID 0 that I had.

 

[Slammy1]

My Caviar SE loaded Windows faster. For some reason, I lost HD performance on this MoBo (P4P800-D). Everything used to open so quickly, now Windows and app load times are nothing to get excited about, even on a Raptor. I rather miss my slow UW SCSI drives <sniff>. Well, they were much slower but data integrity was better; less skips and such on music playback.

EDIT: On Sandra I score the same as a 10k U160, which would seem about right except I get slow downs.