Hi i have just hooked up a western digital 160GB sata drive on my MSI K8T Neo-FIS2R board
Here is the benchmark results from sisoftware sandra
Benchmark Breakdown
Buffered Read 74 MB/s
Sequential Read 54 MB/s
Random Read 7 MB/s
Buffered Write 49 MB/s
Sequential Write 53 MB/s
Random Write 14 MB/s
Average Access Time 7 ms (estimated)
Why is the buffered write actually slower than the sequential write? As i thought the whole point of buffering was to increase performance.
Here is the benchmark of my 4 year old PATA drive
Buffered Read 84 MB/s
Sequential Read 27 MB/s
Random Read 6 MB/s
Buffered Write 63 MB/s
Sequential Write 20 MB/s
Random Write 5 MB/s
Average Access Time 8 ms (estimated)
As you can see this seems to actually do very well on buffered read and writes compared to the SATA drive.
So my question is which is more important sequential or buffered i.e. which is mostly used by the applications?
Here is the benchmark results from sisoftware sandra
Benchmark Breakdown
Buffered Read 74 MB/s
Sequential Read 54 MB/s
Random Read 7 MB/s
Buffered Write 49 MB/s
Sequential Write 53 MB/s
Random Write 14 MB/s
Average Access Time 7 ms (estimated)
Why is the buffered write actually slower than the sequential write? As i thought the whole point of buffering was to increase performance.
Here is the benchmark of my 4 year old PATA drive
Buffered Read 84 MB/s
Sequential Read 27 MB/s
Random Read 6 MB/s
Buffered Write 63 MB/s
Sequential Write 20 MB/s
Random Write 5 MB/s
Average Access Time 8 ms (estimated)
As you can see this seems to actually do very well on buffered read and writes compared to the SATA drive.
So my question is which is more important sequential or buffered i.e. which is mostly used by the applications?
Facebook
Twitter