Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
smooth

Just Don't Understand It!

Recommended Posts

i wouldn't worry about it, the test is not really a benchmark, but saying that there are a few tricks people use to get higher scores, i think one of them is running the test in 16bit colour mode instead of 32bit.

 

very nice system by the way. :clap:

 

:b33r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it's a combination of 3 things.

Your running it at stock speeds, and not overclocked. So not only your cpu score, but your memory score is gonna be a bit lower.

Your video card/cards, are most likely set to quality, instead of High performance.

Your disk score. It's a very good disk score for one hard drive, but compared to a Raid-0 set up, your not getting the high score there either.

 

But as a whole, yes! It's a great system!

I'm just a maniac!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I do a raid 0 with 1 drive? I have had a raid setup in the past with 2 drives but it really blows when 1 dies and your stuff is not easy to recover the way raid writes to both

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus when using a raid array, it's best to also use a program like Acronis True Image to make a backup image of your whole system.

So if a drive fails, and needs to be replaced, you can just swap it out, rebuild the array, and load the saved image onto it!

I've been using it for years, and Raid-0. Never let me down once!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tx, he still needs more than 1 HD.

 

Yeah, I forgot to mention that part. :blushing:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how you would get any speed benefit out of running raid with 2 partitions from a single disk.

Which is the general reason for this question, his basic disk speed is already good, for a single hard drive.

If the point was mirroring, then yes, I can see a slight benefit, but at a loss of disk space.

 

If you have an article published that I could read up on, I'm always looking to learn more!

Any links on this would be great!

 

Possibly you could give this gentleman your advice, and all would be well?

Maybe what your proposing, is exactly what he wants to do?

I don't know.

Edited by Inteller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok let me ask this. I can add another drive and raid it no big deal.I am running on the sata 6.0 port and there is one more spot open. i can add another 2.0 TB drive just like the first one but does anyone know if I can raid one the sata 6.0 ports? and what about the primary cant be bigger then 2.0TB? And I guess last if I cant raid on that port would there be any benfit then to add the drive and raid it if I need to use the 3.0 sata ports?

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The speed you'd see from adding one more drive in raid, would be negligible! At most (and this is a guess), you might see 140GB/sec, at least you'd see 100GB/sec. Real world wise, you wouldn't notice the difference. Except for having a larger disk array.

 

I don't even have any idea if you can raid the 6.0 device headers??? But I don't see why not??? I have no idea about that!

Maybe someone else can help you there! There's some pretty smart people here!

 

If you really want to build a raid array, and want to see some speed! You should get 3- 300, or 400Gb HD's (7200rpm) that all have 32Mb's of cache, and create a raid-0 array!

 

These would make a nice fast Raid-0 array! For $54.99 each (about $170.00 total), for a 1.5TB array!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319

Edited by Inteller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom line is, if your happy with your 2TB drive, then just keep it as is!

 

With just 2 HD's, your not going to see any blazing speeds.

See if someone else can help you out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 x 1tb drives in raid 0 on 3GB sata ports = 259MB for me.. ;)

 

mainpc:/home/terry # hdparm -t -T /dev/md0

/dev/md0:
 Timing cached reads:   18794 MB in  2.00 seconds = 9412.72 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  780 MB in  3.01 seconds = 259.33 MB/sec

each drive on their own..

132MB

134MB

mainpc:/home/terry # hdparm -t -T /dev/sdb

/dev/sdb:
 Timing cached reads:   20460 MB in  2.00 seconds = 10242.58 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  398 MB in  3.00 seconds = 132.50 MB/sec
mainpc:/home/terry # hdparm -t -T /dev/sdc

/dev/sdc:
 Timing cached reads:   18380 MB in  2.00 seconds = 9205.04 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  404 MB in  3.01 seconds = 134.20 MB/sec
so yes you'll always get a speed benefit, even with just 2 drives.

 

now for all other questions i have no idea.. :rofl2:

 

but should think that yes you can raid 0 the 2 6gb sata ports

 

and think i might of read somewhere that the 2TB ntfs limit has been sorted or will be soon, so a 4TB raid 0 partition is/will be possible. :tup:

 

:b33r:

 

this might answer some of your questions. :- http://communities.intel.com/message/80045;jsessionid=7EE23AD636AF08B9994E0199DAC9EA4D.node6COM

Edited by terry1966

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but his drive, and or controller is different (or configured differently), than yours terry!

He's getting 71Gb/sec (I think, can't remember that far back)

 

As you posted, your seeing 132GB/sec

 

So there's a big difference there!

Most likely the size of the HD's cache size!

 

I get 137Gb/sec with my 1.5TB (64Mb Cache)

 

Plus, I didn't actually say he wouldn't get any speed benefit, I had said noticeable speed!

He's using an Intel controller, so it could be as easy as going into your Device Manager, and clicking on your drives, and enable Cache, in the advanced properties.

This alone will increase your disk speed!

 

Posted Image

Edited by Inteller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes those are 64mb cache too, the 32bit cache 1tb drives i have get about 105mbs, can't remember what they got raided tho.

 

71mbs for a 2tb drive regardless of 32 or 64mb cache seems slow to me tho.. :shrug:

 

:b33r:

Edited by terry1966

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it looks like we're both on the same page here! He probably needs to enable the cache on his drive in the Device Manager, like in my pic above! I bet thats the problem!

He could have it set to "Optimize for quick removal" which would account for the slower speeds!

 

 

Plus if he has "Allow Indexing on this Drive" enabled, that will slow his drive down to!

 

:b33r: :b33r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an Atto disk bench of my external HD (1.5TB 64Mb's cache) eSATA cable,

with Indexing disabled, and Cache & performance enabled.

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image

Edited by Inteller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mmmmmmm looking at that crystalmark graph, maybe 71MBs, isn't slow, especially if the pit test uses random reads and not sequential reads for it's speed score. :unsure:

 

:b33r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20k :drool:

 

:clap:

 

:b33r:

 

been thinking too, doesn't the test use the first partition of your first hard drive for the drive test..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...