Shortstroking hard drives... *gasp* A THG article actually worth reading... *shock* [Archive]

Joe Average

03-12-2009, 01:49 PM

Ok, so I'm a bit tough on THG at times, but as someone that was hitting that website a week after it first came online so very long ago it went from what I considered a solid reliable source of info to the sell-out site it is today. But, from time to time they actually have some content that I'll read and find useful, and this is one of 'em:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/short-stroking-hdd,2157.html

A guide on true shortstroking hard drives, and I don't mean just by partitioning them when you install the OS - I mean true shortstroking where you alter the actual configuration parameters of a given drive using the manufacturer's tool to literally change the physical capacity of the drive.

Not a lot of people have considered that possibility, but it's there and it absolutely ensures that the drive's heads will never exceed the given range set into the configuration. Yes, it does give effectively the same type of performance but even so, if you're going to do it right, hell, do it right I say.

And of course, when you truly shortstroke a drive in the manner they're suggesting by the configuration alteration, you will be losing that extra space for as long as you keep the altered configuration in place, regardless of what OS or partitioning strategy you choose: when it's shortstroked properly, that space doesn't even exist as far as the drive mechanics are concerned, it's not like free space that hasn't been partitioned yet.

But you [H]ard folk know this, right? ;)

So, kudos to THG for this one. Their comparison charts are actually very useful at times also, so I'll give 'em a nod for that also. This article is just a few days old and I know "shortstroking" has been a relatively hot topic around here of late, so... now there's some more info to sink your [H]ard teeth into, folks.

Pocatello

03-12-2009, 05:39 PM

Interesting article.

Thanks for the link.

How many here are shortstroking their drives? I have seen that some guys short stroke the velociraptors. Interesting results from THG's testing.

Joe Average

03-13-2009, 12:54 AM

Syntax Error

03-13-2009, 01:16 AM

My Velociraptors are shortstroked from the factory sooo... ;) 80GB models sold through Dell... now I'm wondering if they're permanently this way or just limited by configuration. Pretty sure they're permanent, but it sure would be cool if I could "open 'em up" to the full 300GB...

Heh, reminds me of the good 'ol days of graphics cards when pixel pipelines were simply shut off by VBIOS or firmware; made products like those ATI 9500 PROs or the early x800s like gold from the amount of performance increases for free that one can get by simply "unleashing" the card to its true potential.

Too bad they laser cut all that stuff nowadays for the rejected stock. :(

nitrobass24

03-13-2009, 02:01 AM

I mean WTF the point?

Ok its the *right* way to do it, but its just more complicated and provides the same results.

Why? I just don't get it.

Stereodude

03-13-2009, 12:55 PM

I short stroked a HD in my P4-3.06gHz over 5 years ago that I only used for the pagefile. So, the idea certainly isn't new. :o

In actual use there's no benefit to reducing the LBA vs. just using a smaller partition. Going even further down the rabbit hole you probably don't even need to make a small partition if you keep all the data at the front of the drive with defragging. However, the issue with the last method is that the OS could decide to put data all over the drive negating the effect until you defrag again.

I believe the LBA reduction allows the benefit to be accurately benchmarked by tools that work on a drive level (ignoring partitions) but isn't needed in real use.

I just put a short stroked 500GB WD5000BEVT into my laptop. It's much faster than the old 80GB Fujitsu, but it has a much higher STR in addition to improved access times from short stroking.

Duke3d87

03-13-2009, 01:33 PM

I found out the day the article went up that i already short stroked my drives.

comparing a 160 GB partition to around a 800 GB partition (2x500 GB RE3)

Access time is around 8.4 ms 12ish (160 GB vs. 800

and read times are significantly improved as well.

Joe Average

03-13-2009, 02:01 PM

I just put a short stroked 500GB WD5000BEVT into my laptop. It's much faster than the old 80GB Fujitsu, but it has a much higher STR in addition to improved access times from short stroking.

Just curious how much you shortstroked that 500 as I'm looking at getting a WD Black 500GB drive for my laptop... is the minor boost to performance (and realistically it is minor, it's not like we're doubling the speeds or anything) really worth the loss of the additional space or, are you like some folks that store things in other locations and just want a fast laptop on the go where you can just network back in for the content?

Old Hippie

03-13-2009, 03:06 PM

Peteman100

03-13-2009, 03:28 PM

Dan_D

03-13-2009, 03:32 PM

I'll have to read that when I get the chance. Seems interesting.

Joe Average

03-13-2009, 03:34 PM

Ahhh, I thought these Flecom specials started as 150GB models?

Nah, he had (and might still have) some 80GB models from Dell pulls. The Velociraptors can be found in 80GB (Dell), 150GB (retail), 160GB (Dell), and 300GB (retail) variants from what I can tell.

/me pets his VelociRAID 0 setup... 6.3ms... and for the cost it was worth every cent for the speeds I'm getting. ;)

Contact FLECOM, you might get lucky, who knows.

Dan_D

03-13-2009, 03:36 PM

Nah, he had (and might still have) some 80GB models from Dell pulls. The Velociraptors can be found in 80GB (Dell), 150GB (retail), 160GB (Dell), and 300GB (retail) variants from what I can tell.

/me pets his VelociRAID 0 setup... 6.3ms... and for the cost it was worth every cent for the speeds I'm getting. ;)

Contact FLECOM, you might get lucky, who knows.

I had a Velociraptor RAID 0 setup until one of the drives shit the bed on me. I've got to finish the RMA process.

GLSauron

03-13-2009, 03:59 PM

Just curious how much you shortstroked that 500 as I'm looking at getting a WD Black 500GB drive for my laptop... is the minor boost to performance (and realistically it is minor, it's not like we're doubling the speeds or anything) really worth the loss of the additional space or, are you like some folks that store things in other locations and just want a fast laptop on the go where you can just network back in for the content?
Curious about this too, as a 500GB or a 60GB SSD are in my future, for the upcoming laptop. It'll be my main machine and have a decent CPU, in addition to the dual monitors and etc Im using now. 60GB will be plenty of space without a pagefile or any games installed.

Joe Average

03-13-2009, 04:03 PM

True story from days past:

A friend of mine (online friend, that is, he's a Canuck and I'm in the US, probably will never meet in person but even so...) was a radio engineer for a certain Canuckian FM station years ago. He needed to upgrade one or more servers at the station, as I understand it, and this was just about the time the "new" Raptors hit the market, meaning the original 36GB Western Digital Raptors.

So he puts in a request to management to order one for the new server. He gets approved, orders it, gets it in a few days, and wham - it choked and died in a couple of days. RMA'ed that one to WD, got a replacement a few days later.

The second one barely made it a week, RMA'ed for another, few more days till it arrives.

Bam... that one made it 9 days I think, maybe 10. RMA'ed again, now working on the 4th drive which came in a week later.

Bam-bam, dead inside of 2 weeks.

4 Raptors, all toasted, in about 2 months time. Needless to say that guy will never ever buy another WD product for himself or any job he's at as an I.T. manager. :D

Never seen such bad luck with "new" drives before, and in my own experience I've only had one brand new drive die like that: years ago I grabbed a Maxtor 80GB model (pre-Seagate days), sometime around late 2003. Worked great for 6.5 days, then literally I started hearing a high pitched shrill, then that grinding noise, and then more grinding, and before I could even yank the power cord from the power supply on the back of the PC, literally screeched to a halt.

The bearings had totally gone kaput-finito... and the manufacturing date on the drive was like 3 weeks prior to my purchase, so it literally was brand new, or as new as I could hope a drive would be.

But, that's the only Maxtor that's failed for me in my own machines ever (knock on wood as I'm testing another old 80GB Maxtor with SeaTools as I'm typing this, so far so good). Seagate branded drives are the only hardware that has never gone bad in my machines or in client hardware, still the only brand that can make that claim - as the case is - but... Seagate doesn't make 10K rpm drives for desktops so... ;)

Wonder why they don't, given they basically invented SCSI enterprise class hardware. If anyone could do a 10K or 15K rpm better I'd put my money on them... and yet they still haven't moved into 10K desktop drives. I wonder...

ps
The SeaTools Long test passed... w00t... :D

Duke3d87

03-13-2009, 04:11 PM

Curious about this too, as a 500GB or a 60GB SSD are in my future, for the upcoming laptop. It'll be my main machine and have a decent CPU, in addition to the dual monitors and etc Im using now. 60GB will be plenty of space without a pagefile or any games installed.

I posted this picture in another thread. 2x500 GB RE3, Gigabyte EP45-DQ6 (ICH10R)

160 GB

http://i44.tinypic.com/25hl8j8.png

800 GBish

http://i43.tinypic.com/2cienf7.png

So yeah, there's a pretty big boost in performance.

Dan_D

03-13-2009, 04:12 PM

Well I've had several RAID 0 arrays since they released the 74GB Raptors. I had a 2 drive array, one of which failed. Later on I lost both those drives due to a power supply failure down the line. Both of them had their electronics baked. I had a 4 drive Raptor 150 RAID 0array. I lost one drive in that array too. Now I've lost one in my Velociraptor 300GB array.

Joe Average

03-13-2009, 04:18 PM

Write-caching really wrecks those benchmarks. Re-run 'em without that enabled on the ICH10R and things will be a bit more accurate... (no pun intended) :D

And, if you can find Everest someplace, I'd love to see the results of the Read Suite with that app. I tend to favor those results more than others sometimes... thanks

Bleh, would be nice if I posted the damned picture, eh...

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/6850/everest.png

That's with the 2x80GB Velociraptors (full capacity) in RAID 0 (Duh...), Gigabyte EP45-UD3LR mobo, Intel ICH10R chipset, and Windows 7 x64 build 7048. I'm about to image this just for shits and giggles, redo the array to 2x10GB and slap XP Pro x64 on it and redo the tests... wonder what kinda bump I'll see. :D

And yes, I disabled the Write-caching on the ICH10R just now also. With it on I get:

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1953/everest2x.png

Gotta love those burst speeds, eh?

Sabrewulf165

03-13-2009, 04:34 PM

True story from days past:

yada yada dead raptors

While I understand your friend's plight, I don't think it's terribly fair to judge WD as a company based on four failed drives of a BRAND new product line that didn't even exist before that generation.

yada yada Seagate is my favorite

Just to show that there are two sides to every coin, I've had dozens of WD drives over the years and never had a single problem with any of them (including raptors, though admittedly I never had a 36 gig raptor). I've had a smaller number of Seagates and have had one fail, and one that was gimped in the firmware. I used to favor Seagate myself, but lately it seems like they've gone to the crapper (a friend of mine often jokes that Maxtor actually bought Seagate, not the other way around :p )

Not saying my choice is any "righter" than yours, I just think it's funny how personal experience affects people's judgment over logic sometimes. I admit I'm just as guilty of it here as I'm saying you are, I just find it all amusing :D

Joe Average

03-13-2009, 04:38 PM

Yah, we all suffer from it sometimes. :D

Also, I JUST NOTED that Intel updated their Storage Matrix drivers like, one hour ago so... if you use ICH hardware, go get the latest and greatest, just posted today literally an hour ago:

http://www.intel.com/support/chipsets/imsm/

Version 8.8.0.1009 dated February 27th (but released today, March 13th). Release notes at:

http://downloadmirror.intel.com/17412/eng/releasenotes.htm

Guess I need to redo some testing... bleh. ;)

stainremover

03-14-2009, 06:31 AM

good article, rather informative. digging the benchies as well.

caRpetbomBer

03-14-2009, 10:05 AM

4 old 74gb 8meg cache raptors in a short stoke raid 0.:)

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/9173/4raptors.jpg

Old Hippie

03-14-2009, 02:38 PM

Even though it doesn't mean anything, you gotta love that burst rate. :)

Joe Average

03-14-2009, 02:42 PM

That even trounces the FusionIO SSD thingamajigamabob Vaporware thing I just read about... WOW!!!

</heavy_dose_of_sarcasm> :D

Old Hippie

03-14-2009, 03:00 PM

That even trounces the FusionIO SSD thingamajigamabob Vaporware thing I just read about... WOW!!!

That's because it was the MKII version....the MarkIII is alot faster! :D

Old Hippie

03-14-2009, 03:11 PM

Nah, he had (and might still have) some 80GB models from Dell pulls.

Just so ya know, I bought one several months before you did.

AFAIK the VR 300 came with two 150GB platters and the Flecom specials were 150GB versions with one platter shortstroked to 80GB.

If you can do magic and unleash 300GB from that, way more power to ya!

Joe Average

03-14-2009, 03:13 PM

I wish... but it's a foregone conclusion at this point that they're simply manufactured with a different process meaning they could be single platters, two heads, etc. No idea really as I don't know of anyone that's disassembled one (defective, of course) and taken a peek inside.

Would be nice to "unlock" 'em though if such a thing were possible, it really would. :)

Old Hippie

03-14-2009, 03:16 PM

Joe Average

03-14-2009, 03:22 PM

Ok so, if the 150GB is one platter, assuming both sides are used, then the 80GB would be just one side... whereas potentially it would actually be faster if it was cut-in-half meaning on half the platter from outer edge to the inside middle was used...

That snapshot FLECOM had of that one single 80GB that showed like 175MB/s sustained reads was what caught my eye and most everyone else's too, but he's stated he can't stand posting those because they're so unreliable and inconsistent.

Oh well, I'd still love to get two more from him and get close to 500MB/s but that's just braggin' rights kinda stuff, two of these are fine. I'll probably break the RAID set anyway and do them separately for a variety of reasons...

So one platter, and probably just one side of one platter, that'll work.

Is it just me or is that date of March 6th, 2009, pretty late to the game for a review considering the 300GB model has been out close to a year? :)

Old Hippie

03-14-2009, 03:37 PM

Is it just me or is that date of March 6th, 2009, pretty late to the game for a review considering the 300GB model has been out close to a year?

If you would like me to find an earlier review that states VRs have 150GB platters I will, but I consider it common knowledge and not "simply manufactured with a different process".

That snapshot FLECOM had of that one single 80GB that showed like 175MB/s sustained reads was what caught my eye

It caught everybody's eye, including mine. Those numbers have never been achieved by anybody else but him.

If you keep reading and it hasn't been "lost" by this site's "fuck-ups", after I recieved mine, I challenged those numbers. It seems those numbers were produced on a "work machine" and they were never able to be reproduced again.

Old Hippie

03-14-2009, 03:50 PM

So one platter, and probably just one side of one platter, that'll work.
Ok so, if the 150GB is one platter, assuming both sides are used, then the 80GB would be just one side...

When platters can be read from both sides, let me know.

Maybe your day will be better tomorrow? :D

Old Hippie

03-14-2009, 06:16 PM

Just thought I'd add, that 80GB VR is no match for my 128GB Titan.

You can benchmark all you want, and I've had all those "extreme" OS drives, but in my experience, this Titan is the best I've ever had.

We can talk all day long about benchmarks but in my world, SSDs are the benchmarks to beat.

Sabrewulf165

03-15-2009, 01:06 AM

http://www.intel.com/support/chipsets/imsm/[/url]

Version 8.8.0.1009 dated February 27th (but released today, March 13th). Release notes at:

http://downloadmirror.intel.com/17412/eng/releasenotes.htm

Oooh, thanks for bringing that to my attention, probably wouldn't have noticed otherwise:)

sdadept

03-15-2009, 02:18 AM

i remember a long time ago as well when THG used to be a useful site to read. It's a piece of garbage now though. Almost never a useful article. They've sold out %100.

Michaelius

03-15-2009, 10:17 AM

Hmm ok but what's the point in shortstroking HDD like this ?
If you shortstroke your velociraptor to something like 60 gigs you could have just as well bought 60gb Vertex SSD for similar cash

Sabrewulf165

03-15-2009, 01:45 PM

Hmm ok but what's the point in shortstroking HDD like this ?
If you shortstroke your velociraptor to something like 60 gigs you could have just as well bought 60gb Vertex SSD for similar cash

If you're using Matrix RAID, you can set up a "shortstroked" RAID 0 for the OS/programs/scratch/whatever, then use the rest of the space as a mirror for more important data. You can do this with single disks too, but obviously you won't be striping or mirroring anything.

Volkum

03-15-2009, 01:51 PM

Contact FLECOM, you might get lucky, who knows.

Sorry, I think I bought all of them :D

Joe Average

03-15-2009, 02:07 PM

Yah, I was happy to get my two when I did. Everything fell together: he had some, I had the money at just the right time, etc... ;)

But even so:

FLECOM, IF YOU READ THIS... I'd like a standing order for 2 80GB Velociraptors if you acquire more... thanks. :D

sphinx99

03-15-2009, 02:25 PM

If you're using Matrix RAID, you can set up a "shortstroked" RAID 0 for the OS/programs/scratch/whatever, then use the rest of the space as a mirror for more important data. You can do this with single disks too, but obviously you won't be striping or mirroring anything.

I've been doing this for a few years with every system drive and see no downside. It improves the overall performance of my OS and applications, and also reduces the size / increases the speed of my OS+Apps backup image. And, I have the remainder of a fast, high capacity disk available for whatever I might want it for.

Malakai

04-04-2009, 02:44 AM

True story from days past:

So he puts in a request to management to order one for the new server. He gets approved, orders it, gets it in a few days, and wham - it choked and died in a couple of days. RMA'ed that one to WD, got a replacement a few days later.

The second one barely made it a week, RMA'ed for another, few more days till it arrives.

Bam... that one made it 9 days I think, maybe 10. RMA'ed again, now working on the 4th drive which came in a week later.

Bam-bam, dead inside of 2 weeks.

That is crazy mate. I have been using the same 74gb raptor for a very long time with no issues (still performs like day 1), and various other WD drives for many years. Ive had several maxtors die, never one of my WDs.

CedricFP

04-04-2009, 05:13 AM

Some basic questions:

1. Is short stroking via way of partition simply partitioning off the outer area of the platter of a disc(s) by making it the first partition?

2. When short stroking 2 discs in raid, can the remaining space be partitioned into a storage drive? 3

3. If (2) is possible, will the initial partition of the short stroked drive have faster performance than the second partition, even though both belong to the same set of physical HDD's?

Thank you much for your replies.

Malakai

04-05-2009, 09:14 AM

1) Yes
2) Yes, as long as it is not in use for general computing. I am going to keep the partition invisible to windows and use it for alternative OS. storing fully installed incl games image of os disk, ect.

3) Dont really understand the question.

Now I have a q guys, will the Raid controller on an ATI/AMD SB750 chipset do short stroking the same ways as discussed in thsi thread? People keep saying 'only if u have intel blahblah chipset'.

CedricFP

04-05-2009, 09:31 AM

2) Yes, as long as it is not in use for general computing. I am going to keep the partition invisible to windows and use it for alternative OS. storing fully installed incl games image of os disk, ect.

Could I use this volume for storage but still access it from windows? I don't understand what you mean when you say it is not in use for general computing.

3) Dont really understand the question.

Will the short-stroked area still see performance gains even though I use the remaining space for storage?

ikjadoon

04-05-2009, 10:26 AM

This is what I've done with my WD 640GB:

1st 50GB: Windows
Next 160GB: Programs
Last 430GB: TV Recordings

50GB Partition:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a286/ikjadoon/partitionbench.jpg

160GB Programs Partition:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a286/ikjadoon/partitionbench2.jpg

Now, I'm not sure if I've "done" anything because I access other parts of the drive at the same time, but I keep my Windows files near the front. :)

~Ibrahim~

Malakai

04-05-2009, 05:08 PM

Could I use this volume for storage but still access it from windows? I don't understand what you mean when you say it is not in use for general computing.

Will the short-stroked area still see performance gains even though I use the remaining space for storage?

You need to visualize how this works and you will answer your own question. To improve the performance of your filesystem, you are only using lets say the outer 20% of each platter in the drive. If you have to access the other 80% of the drive, then the heads are moving all over the place again and you lose the performance gain. The point is to limit the drive heads to a small area on the outside of the disk for max performance.

CedricFP

04-06-2009, 02:48 AM

You need to visualize how this works and you will answer your own question. To improve the performance of your filesystem, you are only using lets say the outer 20% of each platter in the drive. If you have to access the other 80% of the drive, then the heads are moving all over the place again and you lose the performance gain. The point is to limit the drive heads to a small area on the outside of the disk for max performance.

I understand.

Thanks very much for your help. :)