S-ATA HARDDRIVE HAS PORE PERFORMANCE

[YokoiL]

Hello,

I just bought a Seagate Barracuda S-ATA 80Gb HD
and it says its suppose have a 150Mb/s transferrate
But when i tested mine its only 88mb/s transferrate.
Can anyone tell me what i am doing wrong maybe i need
better drivers or is it my HD or is it because i am using onboard
S-ATA controller.

My system:
AMD XP 3000+
ASUS A7N8X-Deluxe with silicone image 3112 S-ATA controller
SEAGATE Barracuda S-ATA 80 Gb HD
256 Mb Corsair ram
ATI Radeon 9700 PRO

 

[pillage2001]

Theoretical speed is 150mb/s

Real world is very very much lower. Your 88mb/s seems about right.

 

[YokoiL]

That sucks its like i am buying a ferrari
with fiat engine, that is falls advertisement!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hej but thanx for the reply

 

[pillage2001]

Curious.......what did you test with???

 

[Duvie]

Was that the peak as shown with hdtach???

JUst think about it the Harddrives have been scamming us for some time now...

ATA133 should have a theoretical 133mb/s but on average with 40gb platters only gets like in the mid 40's.....ATA100 was like in the 30's and so on....

The thing would have been to get 10000rpm raptors since in most cases the S-ata doesn't offer much real world performance over ata133 when on a single 7200rpm drive....

 

[xylem]

150 MB/s is the max throughput for the data channel, and the maximum theoretical burst transfer rate for that drive on the channel, not a promisted, sustained, throughput for the drive. It is also unlikely that any uncached bursts at 150 MB/s will occur. If you are in fact getting an 88 MB/s sustained transfer rate from your drive, that is, IMO, amazingly high performance for a single drive, more than double what I get from my "ATA 133" drive.

 

[Budman]

S-ATA HARDDRIVE HAS PORE PERFORMANCE

Your english is very PORE too.

 

[YokoiL]

Ok sorry i wrote "PORE" = "POOR" wrong
i was in school and i was in a hurry so "BITE ME".

I am using George's Disk Performance Test v0.14
and
Steel bytes HD_SPEED available at www.steelbytes.com

 

[bacillus]

i was in a hurry so "BITE ME".

hmm, I wouldn't make such comments to Budman!

 

[CQuinn]

JUst think about it the Harddrives have been scamming us for some time now...

ATA133 should have a theoretical 133mb/s but on average with 40gb platters only gets like in the mid 40's.....ATA100 was like in the 30's and so on....

No they haven't. Just because the data coming off the platters cannot go over a certain speed
does not mean you are not getting a benefit from ATA-100/133 or SATA-150. The electronics
on the drive can pass some information (commands, ACKnowledgement of data transfer,
drive status) along at the higher bandwidth.

You won't see that on most benchmarks because they only test the users data throughput from the platters, and don't test for signalling from the device.

The basic idea is to always have your data channel with a much higher speed ceiling than your
devices, so you never have to worry about the opposite problem, the rest of the system not
being fast enough to get information off the drive at its full speed.

 

[Budman]

Originally posted by: YokoiL
Ok sorry i wrote "PORE" = "POOR" wrong
i was in school and i was in a hurry so "BITE ME".

I am using George's Disk Performance Test v0.14
and
Steel bytes HD_SPEED available at www.steelbytes.com

Maybe you should go back to school & study harder because you're failing english.

 

[jhu]

damn, i'm glad i'm using fibre channel

 

[xenos500]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Was that the peak as shown with hdtach???

JUst think about it the Harddrives have been scamming us for some time now...

ATA133 should have a theoretical 133mb/s but on average with 40gb platters only gets like in the mid 40's.....ATA100 was like in the 30's and so on....

The thing would have been to get 10000rpm raptors since in most cases the S-ata doesn't offer much real world performance over ata133 when on a single 7200rpm drive....

what are you talking about man?

I have a seagate 7200.7 120GB and its ATA100....it also does not transfer "like in the 30's", its 62MB/s.

ATA133 is hardly even a valid interface, the only company that makes drives with it is Maxtor, and they have to give away the controllers in their retail boxes because so few people can even take advantage of it.....nor do they care, because there is almost no adantage.

In a simplified example.....comparing max harddrive speed with max interface speed is like this:

Imagine that a hard drive is a car....and the interface speed (sata 150, ata100, ata133) is how high the speedometer goes.

lets say you have 3 of the same exact car, and one had a 150mph speedometer, and one has a 100 and one has a 133. Well all three cars can only go 60! They preform the same on the road.

There is no real preformance bennifit except when you are maxing out the interface.
Suppose all three cars went down a huge hill....and they were able to go 140mph.
all the cars except the one with the 150mph speedometer would have maxed out the guages (and for the sake of the example, stopped going faster at 100 and 133 respectivly.
(going down the hill is the equivilant of reading from the disk cache, this is the only time the hard drive can send data at speeds capable of maxing the interface. )

 

[slaves123]

Well there is no problem, you have to know that the SATA hard disk don't have a 150Mb/s data tranfer from disk to Processessor, the 150MB/s is the speed between the interface and the rest of the system, thats why when you use a program to determine the velocity of you disk it tells you a little amount compared with the interface speed.
Let me tell you 88MB is a lot, really a lot... incredible of only one disk and not in a SCSI one, I tell you, everything is more than OK with you new SEAGATE, i will only give you a piece of advise, be sure of cooling it, having a HDD Cooler it's very importante in this Hard disk, and if you think it is not enough for you with that perfonmance, you should start thinking in a RAID 0 system, see you, and good Luck!


MFP

 

[jiffylube1024]

HAHAHAHA. That's the funniest thing I've ever heard!

150MB/s is the maximum BURST transfer speed. And even that is a theoretical number, typically not reached except in RAID.

I just went from an 80GB Maxtor 7200 rpm drive to a 120GB SATA Maxtor 7200 RPM 8MB drive. Sandra shows an increase from 21MB/s to 36MB/s, with a similar improvement in HDTach (the SATA drive averages 47.7MB/s). Still no 150MB/s, but impressive nonetheless .

 

[Jeff7181]

You guys are silly... who gives a flying cow turd what the PEAK transfer rate is? You have any idea how often you'll hit that peak? Almost never... sustained average transfer rates are what's important... as well as seek time.

SATA does NOT improve performance as much as some people seem to believe. It's not like an 800 mhz bus vs. a 533 mhz bus. Yes, it increases the theoretical maximum of the controller. And it MAY have some benefit in terms of latency, but I doubt it. Hard drives are slow because they have to physically read from the disks... not because the bus limits them. So pretty much, if a SATA hard drive performs better than an ATA133, or an ATA100 for that matter, it's most likely because of higher data density on the platters, better caching algorithms, a larger cache, or increased spindle speed (such as the Raptor)... NOT because it's "SATA"

 

[spclwpns]

I gotta try that proggy. That's one hell of a speed demon for one drive, my '2' 7200.7's only score about 77,000 on RAID (the slowest of the array's listed).

Heh, tried that thing and my 2 Seagates got an avg. of 85k. Maxtors = 105k. Raptors 110k. These are 'reads' btw, so if your getting that kind of a score with one drive your doing quite well I'd say......

 

[jjyiz28]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You guys are silly... who gives a flying cow turd what the PEAK transfer rate is? You have any idea how often you'll hit that peak? Almost never... sustained average transfer rates are what's important... as well as seek time.

SATA does NOT improve performance as much as some people seem to believe. It's not like an 800 mhz bus vs. a 533 mhz bus. Yes, it increases the theoretical maximum of the controller. And it MAY have some benefit in terms of latency, but I doubt it. Hard drives are slow because they have to physically read from the disks... not because the bus limits them. So pretty much, if a SATA hard drive performs better than an ATA133, or an ATA100 for that matter, it's most likely because of higher data density on the platters, better caching algorithms, a larger cache, or increased spindle speed (such as the Raptor)... NOT because it's "SATA"

jeff, i rated you a 10. how did you become an uber-geek??
as an add-on, i believe the only time you get to reach the interface speed, ie 133, or 150mb/s for sata, is when it is read off the cache which is on the controller card rather than the platter

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You guys are silly... who gives a flying cow turd what the PEAK transfer rate is? You have any idea how often you'll hit that peak? Almost never... sustained average transfer rates are what's important... as well as seek time.

By "you guys" you mean YokoiL[/l], right? Because everyone else here pointed this fact out, and all of us pointed out how meaningless burst transfers are.

I got a big increase in my Maxtor because my old one had only a 2MB cache, and there must have been something wonky with it also (it had 80GB platters, but performed like it had 20GB ones). We all know (minus the thread creator) how little difference SATA makes. We've read the same reviews and comparaisons you have.

 

[YokoiL]

Hej i found a page with
a bios flash for my motherboard
its suppose to give me;
"Advanced S-ATA: Additional Biossettings and newest controller ROM"
Do you think it is worth it?????

This is the website (its in german though)

http://www.anycities.com/user/mainboards/asus/asus.html

ASUS A7N8X-DELUXE rev 2.00