• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

sandra bench seagate 320gb perpendicular

S

soccrstar

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
164
jus posting my result of my new storage drive. i'm going to buy another and raid them. the drive index is not far from my OS drive (74gb 16mb raptor) which benched 81MB/s



SiSoftware Sandra

Benchmark Results
Drive Index : 73 MB/s
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Random Access Time : 14 ms
Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.

Performance Test Status
Processor Affinity : No
System Timer : 3.2GHz
Use Overlapped I/O : Yes
IO Queue Depth : 4 request(s)
Block Size : 1MB

Volume Information
Capacity : 298GB

Benchmark Breakdown
Speed at position 0% : 69MB/s (94%)
Speed at position 3% : 72MB/s (99%)
Speed at position 6% : 73MB/s (100%)
Speed at position 10% : 73MB/s (100%)
Speed at position 13% : 69MB/s (94%)
Speed at position 16% : 70MB/s (96%)
Speed at position 20% : 72MB/s (99%)
Speed at position 23% : 66MB/s (90%)
Speed at position 26% : 64MB/s (88%)
Speed at position 30% : 68MB/s (93%)
Speed at position 33% : 67MB/s (93%)
Speed at position 36% : 66MB/s (91%)
Speed at position 40% : 67MB/s (92%)
Speed at position 43% : 65MB/s (90%)
Speed at position 46% : 62MB/s (85%)
Speed at position 50% : 62MB/s (86%)
Speed at position 53% : 61MB/s (85%)
Speed at position 56% : 60MB/s (82%)
Speed at position 60% : 59MB/s (81%)
Speed at position 63% : 59MB/s (82%)
Speed at position 66% : 57MB/s (79%)
Speed at position 70% : 54MB/s (74%)
Speed at position 73% : 53MB/s (74%)
Speed at position 76% : 54MB/s (75%)
Speed at position 80% : 51MB/s (71%)
Speed at position 83% : 50MB/s (69%)
Speed at position 86% : 48MB/s (65%)
Speed at position 90% : 44MB/s (61%)
Speed at position 93% : 45MB/s (62%)
Speed at position 96% : 40MB/s (55%)
Speed at position 100% : 37MB/s (52%)
Random Access Time : 14 ms (estimated)
Full Stroke Access Time : 18 ms (estimated)
 
SiSoftware Sandra

Benchmark Results
Drive Index : 106 MB/s
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Random Access Time : 13 ms
Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.

Performance Test Status
Processor Affinity : No
Use Overlapped I/O : Yes
IO Queue Depth : 4 request(s)
Block Size : 1MB

Volume Information
Capacity : 596GB

Benchmark Breakdown
Speed at position 0% : 102MB/s (96%)
Speed at position 3% : 105MB/s (99%)
Speed at position 6% : 95MB/s (90%)
Speed at position 10% : 100MB/s (95%)
Speed at position 13% : 98MB/s (92%)
Speed at position 16% : 95MB/s (90%)
Speed at position 20% : 106MB/s (100%)
Speed at position 23% : 97MB/s (92%)
Speed at position 26% : 94MB/s (89%)
Speed at position 30% : 98MB/s (92%)
Speed at position 33% : 101MB/s (96%)
Speed at position 36% : 95MB/s (90%)
Speed at position 40% : 86MB/s (81%)
Speed at position 43% : 95MB/s (89%)
Speed at position 46% : 104MB/s (98%)
Speed at position 50% : 98MB/s (93%)
Speed at position 53% : 102MB/s (96%)
Speed at position 56% : 98MB/s (93%)
Speed at position 60% : 103MB/s (98%)
Speed at position 63% : 102MB/s (97%)
Speed at position 66% : 104MB/s (98%)
Speed at position 70% : 100MB/s (95%)
Speed at position 73% : 103MB/s (98%)
Speed at position 76% : 96MB/s (91%)
Speed at position 80% : 96MB/s (91%)
Speed at position 83% : 93MB/s (88%)
Speed at position 86% : 88MB/s (83%)
Speed at position 90% : 84MB/s (79%)
Speed at position 93% : 86MB/s (81%)
Speed at position 96% : 78MB/s (74%)
Speed at position 100% : 71MB/s (67%)
Random Access Time : 13 ms (estimated)
Full Stroke Access Time : 7 ms (estimated)
 
TMan1876 said:
Are you going to stripe them together? (Raid 0)
Click to expand...



Volume Information
Capacity : 596GB

it is raid0 :-x hence the 596GB storage. 298x2 7200.10 = 596 Raid0

i was expecting higher index and not 33mb/sec faster. though the access time dropped by 1ms

so in theory adding another 320gb seagate should bring it up to 139mb/sec drive index and 12ms random access. adding a 4th should bring it to 172mb/sec drive index and 11ms random access time. i'm probably wrong on this but jus assumptions
 
Do yourself a favor and make sure everything on that array is backed up elsewhere if it isn't already.
 
TMan1876 said:
Do yourself a favor and make sure everything on that array is backed up elsewhere if it isn't already.
Click to expand...


hehe, I dont trust the silicon image raid card. have nothing important. and stuff that I put on it, doesn't last 1 week before it gets put on a backup media anyway. now if it was a hardware raid. i'd put alot more faith into it
 
The 1ms disparity between seek time measures of the two samples is an anomaly, probably just a differenence between runs and within the margin for error of the test. A RAID-0 array should post identical seek times to a single drive when measured with a single sector random access test (Sandra, HDTach, etc).

Also remember that Sandra is a diagnostic benchmark, not a measure of application level performance/desktop responsivness. Of particular note is the I/O queue depth of four, the block size of 1MB, as well as the 100% random nature of the tests. Real world desktop usage has shorter seeks, lower queue depths, and much smaller transfer sizes.

I don't blame you for not trusting the SI RAID Host, however even top flight hardware RAID controllers don't eliminate the pitfalls and risks of running RAID, and never forget that RAID-0 is not fault tolerant, regardless of the controller.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top