Skybuck's Dream PC for 2006 Full Report, Posting 1

[John Lewis]

On Fri, 05 May 2006 08:22:38 GMT, "SteveH"
<steve.hough@REMOVEMEblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

"Skybuck Flying" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445aaffc$0$712$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl...


*** Total price ***

Absolute basic system: 3283
Extra desired system: 3283 + 1006 = 4289
Extreme system system: 3283 + 1006 + 589 = 4878
Transported system: 3283 + 1006 + 589 + 207 = 5085 (give or take a few
pennies/bucks )

*** END OF SECTION 1 ***

Bye,
Skybuck.
Oh look at what I spent on my PC - BIG DEAL!

Er, I am not sure that the money was earned by him.
A legacy, perhaps ? Or something from his family to help
shut off his ranting within the family circle.

He boasts about his computer, just like the average
male teenager these days might boast about losing his
virginity.......... Um, does that give us a clue as to why
he is flooding these newsgroups ? Somebody find him
as girlfriend ..... quick....

John Lewis

 

[Dorothy Bradbury]

You can't even get 4 GB at DELL only 2 GB and you even and up
spending 600 bucks more ! and that's exclusive their transport costs etc.

Oh gee, he c/posted this to comp.arch - I bet they love you there.


Buyer -- "I just bought a 4GB PC, why can't I use all the memory"
Dell -- mutters, I'm going to kill Gates the next time I see him

Windows isn't too smart at using all 4GB, and if you use Photoshop
you can use up 5 lives just trying to get it to use more than 3.5GB.
Sadly denies revenge on Dell Bangalore IT support staff though...

Which is why people still bought expensive Dual G5s (not as first
thought because it was the worlds most expensive cheese grater).
A black SGI Onyx, now that was about 1980s design & envy Until
the courier asks whether it matters if it slid down the concrete stairs.
Whereupon he is dragged with head bouncing ee-aah-oo-ow down each.

Unfortunately I think you are down to 1 life after the cross-posting.
Qualifying you for to be in charge of a) UK Gov't IT Design Specification
(box with LED wins min bid, rest at 1M per item) & Procurement or
b) FEMA Foresight Planning, Procurement & Rumsfeld Pension.
--
Dorothy Bradbury

 

[Craig Sutton]

"Skybuck Flying" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445b9629$0$752$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl...

"Craig Sutton" <xcxcnxxnxxx@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:e3ept0$d45$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...

"Skybuck Flying" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445aaffc$0$712$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl...
*** Skybuck's Dream PC for 2006 *** FULL REPORT *** Posting 1 ***

Hello,

I plan on writing a full report on Skybuck's Dream PC for 2006.


I'm stil lwaiting on your so called testing you know the ones where you
claim your HD will do 500 MB a second...

I tested it.

The problem is the CPU is bottlenecking the harddisk.

Nope

At least that's my observation.

Wrong

It's the random number generator... it's a pretty simple random number
generator.

Random number generator? umm HELLOOOOOOOOOOO I said use HDTACH

Still the X2 3800+ seems to only be able to generate 90 MB/sec for random
numbers.

random ramblings from a twit

And when I test with data only randomized once it still achieves near 500
MB/sec.

huh what??

I am as baffled as you or anybody else.

I suggest you ask your dealer

The specs for the harddisks are in the 300+ MB/sec range though.

Nope

So what I am seeing is not to strange or far off.

You won't get near 500MB/sec

Check the specs of the harddisk... I can't remember the exact numbers but
it
was something like that...

In the hundreds of megabytes/sec.

Nope fantasyland

Why don't you tell us all what software you actually use for benchmarking so
we can all have a good laugh at your expense.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

"Scotter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:TNP6g.5819$CH2.3244@tornado.texas.rr.com...

If you are talking about building a "dream machine" then 30% improvement
is quite a bit. It's not like you are trying to save money or anything. I
mean if 30% didn't mean much to you then why have two 7900 GTX's? Why not
get two 7900 GT's instead?

GT's make more noise.

I saved 600 bucks by buying a X2 3800+.

600 bucks is enough to buy a new cpu in the future if I want one

I went for two GTX 512 MB because they are hard to get.

Buy now they probably sold out everywhere.

It really doesn't make logical sense for you to max out on other parts but
skimp on CPU with one that is middle of the pack in performance. Get the

For me it makes sense see above.

FX-60! Trust me. I'm running the equivalent of two single core FX-60's
(Opteron 252's run at 2.6ghz) and I would LOVE to have more processor
power!

You will love to have more graphics power.

You can throw away your graphics card in less than one or two years.

Many games will push one of my processors at times to 100%. And when the

Gje I wonder why... maybe that's because they pushing all that textures
stuff to your graphics card... because it does not have enough ram to cache
it all ?

Go for the 512 MB ram graphics cards.

That's the golden rule for pc's... Always stuff it full with RAM.

other processor is busy coding or decoding a DVD or rendering 1000+ frames
of a 3D animation or blah blah blah... you can always use more CPU. PLUS
one reason *I would assume* you build a "dream" system is for
future-proofing. I mean you want this system to run without need of
upgrade for as long as possible, right? And you want it to rock-n-roll on
Vista when it comes out, right? And you want it to more than handle
near-future games at 1920x1200, right? Do not skimp on the brain of your
computer!

You're confusing graphics performance with cpu performance.

Even rendering programs can use graphics cards nowadays.

The most important thing for games nowadays is good graphics cards with
lot's of ram and system ram.

The cpu is on the bottom of the list.

Finally, with AMD's new sockets coming out very soon that support faster
memory... are you sure you don't want to wait 2 months? I know the faster
DDR2 won't make a huge difference in performance. Just curious.

There will always come something better along....

I definetly did not want to wait any longer

Bye,
Skybuck.

--
Scotter
Tyan Thunder K8WE
Dual Opteron 252s (2.6ghz)
4 gig Corsair XMS DDR400 RAM
XFX 7800 GTX 256 w/VGAsilencerV3
500 gig Hitachi SATA 300
160 gig Seagate SATA 150
Dual Dell 24" wide aspect LCDs
550W Antec power supply
X-Fi Platinum Soundblaster
-
"Skybuck Flying" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445b96e3$0$725$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl...
I don't think the X2 4800+ would have performed that much better.

At least the benchmarks I saw only showed 30% improvement.

However I have done my own benchmarks...

And I will write a review about the websites who benchmark these things
because I have something to say about that as well. hehehe.

But I'll have to do a little bit more research on that.

But for now I am not saying a word... But you can feel what direction
it's probably going if you have a poker sense hehe.

Anyway you ll have to wait for my second or third posting on this
topic... probably 3 posting

Bye,
Skybuck.

"Scotter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:laK6g.5755$CH2.2398@tornado.texas.rr.com...
Most of your specs look top-rate... except one thing; the CPU.
Why did you go with an X2 3800+ rather than the highest end X2 you can
get now?
With such mean video cards, your CPU will definitely be a bottleneck @
1900x1200 resolution in games.

--
Scotter
Tyan Thunder K8WE
Dual Opteron 252s (2.6ghz)
4 gig Corsair XMS DDR400 RAM
XFX 7800 GTX 256 w/VGAsilencerV3
500 gig Hitachi SATA 300
160 gig Seagate SATA 150
Dual Dell 24" wide aspect LCDs
550W Antec power supply
X-Fi Platinum Soundblaster
-
"Skybuck Flying" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445aaffc$0$712$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl...
*** Skybuck's Dream PC for 2006 *** FULL REPORT *** Posting 1 ***

Hello,

I plan on writing a full report on Skybuck's Dream PC for 2006.

However it will be to big to put into one posting and it will require
some time as well.

So I am just gonna post as I go along and finally I'll gather
everything or so and put it on a website or maybe not, we'll see.

The first question on my mind is:

What did I buy and how much did it cost me ?

*** BEGIN OF SECTION 1 *** The component list ***:

( All prices in euro's, tax included )

LCD Monitor: Hewlett Packard L2335 (native resolution: 1920x1200,
response time: 16 ms, wide screen)
Price: 1029

Case: Chieftec, Bravo series, BH-01B-B-SL miditower
(silver/black/stylish/modern) (6 harddisk bays, 3 cd rom bays, 1 disk
drive bay)
Price: 75

Power supply: Seasonic S12-600 (600 watt, power efficient, low noise)
Price: 129

Motherboard: Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe (passive cooling, low noise, 64 bit
ready, good connectivity)
Price: 191

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 X2 Manchester 3800+ (Boxed) (dual core, power
efficient, suited for running games at 1900x1200 resolution)
Price: 305

Memory module1: Corsair TWINX2048-3200C2 DDR SDRAM, 1 GB, PC3200, 400
MHz (Double Side, Double Data Rate, Supported by motherboard)
Price: 105

Memory module2: Corsair TWINX2048-3200C2 DDR SDRAM, 1 GB, PC3200, 400
MHz (Double Side, Double Data Rate, Supported by motherboard)
Price: 105

Memory module3: Corsair TWINX2048-3200C2 DDR SDRAM, 1 GB, PC3200, 400
MHz (Double Side, Double Data Rate, Supported by motherboard)
Price: 105

Memory module4: Corsair TWINX2048-3200C2 DDR SDRAM, 1 GB, PC3200, 400
MHz (Double Side, Double Data Rate, Supported by motherboard)
Price: 105

Graphics card1: XFX NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GTX Extreme (512 MB GDDR3)
(Occupies two slots (dual slot), Standard version (non overclocked, for
longer life ) 2DVI/VI, PCI Express x16, Very powerfull )
Price: 585

Graphics card2: XFX NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GTX Extreme (512 MB GDDR3)
(Occupies two slots (dual slot), Standard version (non overclocked, for
longer life ) 2DVI/VI, PCI Express x16, Very powerfull )
Price: 589

Sound card: Creative Soundblaster X-Fi Elite Pro 7.1 (comes with nice
breakout box and headphone connection, remote control etc)
Price: 284

(Note: The soundblaster needs floppy drive power connector)

Network card: not needed, the motherboard has two very fast gigabit
network chips on board
Price: -

Internal Harddisk1: Hitachi Deskstar 7K500 500 GB, 7.200 rpm, 16 MB,
SATA II (HDS725050KLA360)
Price: 348

Internal Harddisk2: Hitachi Deskstar 7K500 500 GB, 7.200 rpm, 16 MB,
SATA II (HDS725050KLA360)
Price: 348

Internal Harddisk3: Third sata harddisk possible (Free space in
miditower available, third sata connector on motherboard available,
power supply sata power connector available, extra sata cable available
came with motherboard)
Price: -

Internal Harddisk4: Fourth sata harddisk possible (Free space in
miditower available, fourth sata connector on motherboard available,
power supply sata power connector available, extra sata cable available
came with motherboard)
Price: -

Internal Harddisk5: Fiveth harddisk will probably need to be an IDE
drive (Free space in miditower available, Free ide connector available
on ide cable came with motherboard, Not sure if power cable/connector
available)
Price: -

Internal Harddisk6: Sixth harddisk will probably need to be an IDE
drive (Free space in miditower available, Free ide connector available
on ide cable came with motherboard, Not sure if power cable/connector
available )
Price: -

External Harddisk7: Seventh harddisk possible via external sata
connector.
Price: -

Optional Harddisk8 ???: Fiveth sata connector available on motherboard
not sure what it's for... it's far away will be hard to connect it
seems.
Price: -

Disk drive: Mitsumi Floppy Disk Drive + 7-in-1 Cardreader (Black)
Price: 25

CD/DVD burner: BenQ DW-1655 16x (Dual Layer, R/W, Black, IDE)
Price: 69

Keyboard: Logitech UltraX, silver.
Price: 28

Mouse: LogitechŽ Click! Optical Mouse
Price indication: 25 (Already had this mouse of old computer and kept
it, so I didn't really pay for this , old computer uses a different
mouse now)

Speakerset: Creative GigaWorks S750
Price: 369

Extra case fan1: Papst 3412/N2GLLE 92x92x25 millimeter (To blow cool
air over internal harddisk 1, 3 and 5) (Very loud/noisy/windy on
motherboard connector but Quiet on low voltage (5 volt) additional
power supply connector)
Price: 19

Extra case fan2: Papst 3412/N2GLLE 92x92x25 millimeter ( To blow cool
air over internal harddisk 2, 4 and 6 ) (Very loud/noisy/windy on
motherboard connector but Quiet on low voltage (5 volt) additional
power supply connector)
Price: 19

Extra case fan3 (optional): Papst 3412/N2GLLE 92x92x25 millimeter (???
To blow or suck air from cpu region ??? not really necessary, untested)
Price: 19

Extra case fan4 (optional): Papst 3412/N2GLLE 92x92x25 millimeter (???
To blow or suck air from graphics card region ??? not really necessary,
untested)
Price: 19

Extra rare case fan (required/smart me thinks): Scythe SFLEX 1200 RPM
120x120x25 millimeter (pretty quiet I think but not 100% sure difficult
to pin point noise, all in all quiet system.)
Price: 19

(The extra rare case fan seems a smart idea to me, it sucks away hot
air from cpu/memory/motherboard region and takes over the roll of the
power supply fan so that the power supply fan can spindle slowly for
even quiet operation.)

Additional screw set to mount extra case fan 1,2,3 and 4:
Price: 5

Additional equipment:

Gigabit network cable (patch through cable suited for direct connection
from pc to pc): Sharkoon RJ45 CAT .6 Gray 10 meters
Price: 15

Gigabit network card (for old computer): 3COM 3C2000T GBit PCI
Price: 49

10x 1.44 MB Floppy disks: Fujji Black
Price: 4

*** Absolute basic system price ***:

LCD Monitor: 1029
Case: 75
Power supply: 129
Motherboard: 191
Processor: 305
Memory1: 105
Graphics card1: 585
Harddisk1: 348
Floppy Disk drive + 7-in-1 cardreader: 25
CD/DVD burner: 69
Keyboard: 28
Mouse: 25
Speakerset: 369

Absolute basic system total: 3283

*** Extra desired basic system price ***:

Memory2: 105
Memory3: 105
Memory4: 105
Harddisk2: 348
Sound card: 284
Extra case fan1: 19
Extra case fan2: 19
Extra rare case fan: 19
Screw set: 2

Extra desired basic system price: 1006

*** Extreme extra system price (I ordered two graphics card just in
case one supplier couldn't deliver so I got both cards hehe pretty
awesome though) ***:

Graphics card2: 589 (two dual slot graphics card fit perfectly on
motherboard, lot's of space between them... even room for a small pci
card between them)

*** Costs ***:

Absolute basic system: 3283
Extra desired system: 3283 + 1006 = 4289
Extreme system system: 3283 + 1006 + 589 = 4878

*** Unnecessary costs ***:

Extra case fan3: 19 (handy for backup or cleaning one and replacing
with new etc)
Extra case fan4: 19 (handy for backup or cleaning one and replacing
with new etc)
Extra screw set: 3

*** Transport costs ***:

Graphics card from Pixmania(No billing information on delivery ?!?):
22.61

Graphics card from Alternate (No billing information on delivery except
from transport company ?!): 14.50

Case, Screws, Floppy Disk Drive, Extra case fans, Network card, Network
Cable from Alternate (Ok billing information): 14.50

CD/DVD drive from Alternate (iComputers had wrong color and removed it
from order): 14.50

Keyboard from perfect systems (I was hoping for the older model but got
newer model still good though, Decent billing information): 13

Speakerset from Perfect Systems: 15

Memory, Processor, Soundblaster, Harddisk, Motherboard, Power supply
from iComputers (Very professional billing information ! My complements
!): 14

Monitor from OBCS (No additional billing information on delivery, only
transport company billing information, no billing information in e-mail
have to travel to website to get it): 98

Total transport costs: 206.11

*** Total price ***

Absolute basic system: 3283
Extra desired system: 3283 + 1006 = 4289
Extreme system system: 3283 + 1006 + 589 = 4878
Transported system: 3283 + 1006 + 589 + 207 = 5085 (give or take a few
pennies/bucks )

*** END OF SECTION 1 ***

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

"Scotter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:hQP6g.5821$CH2.3588@tornado.texas.rr.com...

Every few months ARS TECHNICA puts out a "system guide" where they build
three boxes; a budget box, hotrod, and "god box". You may benefit by
looking at their latest:

http://arstechnica.com/guides/buyer/system-guide-200604.ars

Are you serious ?

That's crap.

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

"Scotter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
newsTP6g.5822$CH2.5432@tornado.texas.rr.com...

I just realized something.
Did you already build this machine?

Yup

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

Random number generator? umm HELLOOOOOOOOOOO I said use HDTACH

Ok, I downloaded, installed and run HDTach I was a bit worried if it would
overwrite anything but it only does read tests.

The cores are running in power saving mode... though it seems this piece of
software forces the cores to run between 1800 MHz and 2000 MHz.

Here are the results of HDTach:

Quickbench 8 MB

Random Access: 12.9 ms
Burst Speed: 124.5 MB/sec
Average Read: 51.1 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 7.0% + - 2.0%

Longbench 16 MB

Random Access: 12.8 ms
Burst Speed: 127.7 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 6%
Average Read: 51.2 MB/sec

The program says:

MB = 1.000.000 bytes which is wrong ! but ok.

I only test drive D:

Drive C: is the same kind of drive though.. but not gonna risk it.

I hope this statisfies your curiosity.

I however I am still not convinced that this is the maximum performance of
the drive.

The HDTach benchmark itself could be the limiting factor.

And that's all I have to say about it. Believe what you want.

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Skybuck Flying]

The specs for the harddisks are in the 300+ MB/sec range though.


Nope

Bullshit.

It's a YUP.

Do some research next time ok ?

Here are the specs:

http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/support/7k500/7k500.htm

Read the SATA section.

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Pooh Bear]

Skybuck Flying wrote:

The specs for the harddisks are in the 300+ MB/sec range though.


Nope

Bullshit. It's a YUP. Do some research next time ok ?

Here are the specs:

http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/support/7k500/7k500.htm

Read the SATA section.

Which part of " Sustained data rate (MB/sec) 64.8 - 31 " don't you
understand ?

The interface speed has relatively little to do with the drive's actual
practical ablity to transfer data.

You need to learn how to read a spec !

Graham

 

[Pooh Bear]

Skybuck Flying wrote:

Random number generator? umm HELLOOOOOOOOOOO I said use HDTACH

Ok, I downloaded, installed and run HDTach I was a bit worried if it would
overwrite anything but it only does read tests.

The cores are running in power saving mode... though it seems this piece of
software forces the cores to run between 1800 MHz and 2000 MHz.

Here are the results of HDTach:

Quickbench 8 MB

Random Access: 12.9 ms
Burst Speed: 124.5 MB/sec
Average Read: 51.1 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 7.0% + - 2.0%

Longbench 16 MB

Random Access: 12.8 ms
Burst Speed: 127.7 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 6%
Average Read: 51.2 MB/sec

The program says:

MB = 1.000.000 bytes which is wrong ! but ok.

It's how disk drive makers specify MB actually.

I only test drive D:

Drive C: is the same kind of drive though.. but not gonna risk it.

I hope this statisfies your curiosity.

I however I am still not convinced that this is the maximum performance of
the drive.

51 MB/sec is exactly what you might expect from the spec ! You need to learn
something about how hard drives work !

Grahqam

 

[martin griffith]

On Sat, 06 May 2006 11:20:45 +0100, in sci.electronics.design Pooh
Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Skybuck Flying wrote:

The specs for the harddisks are in the 300+ MB/sec range though.


Nope

Bullshit. It's a YUP. Do some research next time ok ?

Here are the specs:

http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/support/7k500/7k500.htm

Read the SATA section.

Which part of " Sustained data rate (MB/sec) 64.8 - 31 " don't you
understand ?

The interface speed has relatively little to do with the drive's actual
practical ablity to transfer data.

You need to learn how to read a spec !

Graham
see what units they specify the acoustic noise levels in.....

martin

 

[Skybuck Flying]

Ok,

I just did a test with my own harddisk/file read benchmark...

This time I payed close attention to what happens and this is what happens:

First the read speed is around 50 MB/sec (testing with a 5 Gigabyte file).

It continues for about 10 to 15 seconds or so... at this rate.

I can clearly hear the harddisk rattle and the hd led is burning.

Then after this time it starts to make a bit of less noise and the led
starts to go off sometimes.

The read speed begins to climb to 100 MB/sec, 150, 200 MB/sec and within a
few seconds it's at 500 MB/sec or even over it.

And at this point the harddisk is no longer making any sound and the
harddisk led is off.

So I must come to the conclusion that windows xp 64 bit with 4 GB's of
memory simply cashes enough so that it doesn't have to read anymore... or
maybe only a little bit.

However the benchmark should prevent such caching from taking place..
because the file is so big, actually I should use an even bigger file...
like 50 GB or 100 GB. I also know the benchmark is bugged/limited because
the random function works with 31 bit integers... so a read offset can only
be 2 GB at most.

Some day I will write a 64 bit benchmark which can properly test everything,
the harddisk, the file system, the operating, the caching etc.. all in one
go

For now the HDTach benchmark seems accurate

Actually my benchmark does random reads (I think though... source code not
on this computer yet though) while testing the speed (with 1 MB buffers). I
think sequential read/write speed should even be higher... though some
benchmark websites show lower speeds... that's kinda weird... Some
benchmarks even show faster write speed than read speed... that's also
weird... because caches should make read speeds even faster... but then
again there is also a write cache. So the point of the story is... there is
more to benchmarking then meets they eye (Never trust a single benchmark
or even multiple. Yup. )

Bye,
Skybuck.

 

[Pooh Bear]

martin griffith wrote:

see what units they specify the acoustic noise levels in.....

Seems to quite typical for hard drive manufacturers actually.

Graham

 

[Skybuck Flying]

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445C787D.364ABCFA@hotmail.com...

Skybuck Flying wrote:

The specs for the harddisks are in the 300+ MB/sec range though.


Nope

Bullshit. It's a YUP. Do some research next time ok ?

Here are the specs:

http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/support/7k500/7k500.htm

Read the SATA section.

Which part of " Sustained data rate (MB/sec) 64.8 - 31 " don't you
understand ?

The interface speed has relatively little to do with the drive's actual
practical ablity to transfer data.

Then what does it have to do with ?

You need to learn how to read a spec !

I am just seeing if you stupid enough to fall for it =D

Bye,
Skybuck =D

 

[Craig Sutton]

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445C787D.364ABCFA@hotmail.com...

Skybuck Flying wrote:

The specs for the harddisks are in the 300+ MB/sec range though.


Nope

Bullshit. It's a YUP. Do some research next time ok ?

Here are the specs:

http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/support/7k500/7k500.htm

Read the SATA section.

Which part of " Sustained data rate (MB/sec) 64.8 - 31 " don't you
understand ?

The interface speed has relatively little to do with the drive's actual
practical ablity to transfer data.

You need to learn how to read a spec !

He is a funny fellow isn't he.

Also the Specs page lists 2 lots of specs one for the Pata Model (133meg)
and the other (300 sata2) and just as you wrote. These are the limits of the
Pata/Sata and nothing to do with the speed of the HD.

Say he writes he's only get 51 Mb /s wow the specs list it as 64.8 ;-) geee
seems he has a lemon! wonder if he installed the software to enable SATA2
mode.......

 

[Craig Sutton]

"Skybuck Flying" <spam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445c7350$0$720$5fc3050@dreader2.news.tiscali.nl...

Random number generator? umm HELLOOOOOOOOOOO I said use HDTACH

Ok, I downloaded, installed and run HDTach I was a bit worried if it would
overwrite anything but it only does read tests.

The cores are running in power saving mode... though it seems this piece
of
software forces the cores to run between 1800 MHz and 2000 MHz.

Here are the results of HDTach:

Quickbench 8 MB

Random Access: 12.9 ms
Burst Speed: 124.5 MB/sec
Average Read: 51.1 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 7.0% + - 2.0%

Longbench 16 MB

Random Access: 12.8 ms
Burst Speed: 127.7 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 6%
Average Read: 51.2 MB/sec


The HDTach benchmark itself could be the limiting factor.

And that's all I have to say about it. Believe what you want.

here is another benchmark list of results using drivemark2006 . Your 51

MB/sec reading is rather poor your burst speed is mediocre as well
http://www.storagereview.com/php/benchmark/bench_sort.php

 

[Craig Sutton]

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445C7911.61713B63@hotmail.com...

Skybuck Flying wrote:

Random number generator? umm HELLOOOOOOOOOOO I said use HDTACH

Ok, I downloaded, installed and run HDTach I was a bit worried if it
would
overwrite anything but it only does read tests.

The cores are running in power saving mode... though it seems this piece
of
software forces the cores to run between 1800 MHz and 2000 MHz.

Here are the results of HDTach:

Quickbench 8 MB

Random Access: 12.9 ms
Burst Speed: 124.5 MB/sec
Average Read: 51.1 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 7.0% + - 2.0%

Longbench 16 MB

Random Access: 12.8 ms
Burst Speed: 127.7 MB/sec
CPU Utilization: 6%
Average Read: 51.2 MB/sec

The program says:

MB = 1.000.000 bytes which is wrong ! but ok.

It's how disk drive makers specify MB actually.


I only test drive D:

Drive C: is the same kind of drive though.. but not gonna risk it.

I hope this statisfies your curiosity.

I however I am still not convinced that this is the maximum performance
of
the drive.

51 MB/sec is exactly what you might expect from the spec ! You need to
learn
something about how hard drives work !

Actually that reading is rather poor. I wonder if in all his fiddling with

settings if he has stuffed something up.

Anyway if he's so concerned with the hd speed he should be using raid mode.

 

[Pooh Bear]

Skybuck Flying wrote:

Ok,

I just did a test with my own harddisk/file read benchmark...

This time I payed close attention to what happens and this is what happens:

First the read speed is around 50 MB/sec (testing with a 5 Gigabyte file).

It continues for about 10 to 15 seconds or so... at this rate.

I can clearly hear the harddisk rattle and the hd led is burning.

Then after this time it starts to make a bit of less noise and the led
starts to go off sometimes.

The read speed begins to climb to 100 MB/sec, 150, 200 MB/sec and within a
few seconds it's at 500 MB/sec or even over it.

This makes no sense since it's beyond the drive's ability to read data that fast
( see spec ).

The capacity of the drive to transfer data is highly determined by mechanical
constraints ( moving the head etc ) like you heard. That's the *real* transfer
rate.

I understood these specs long before you probably ever touched a computer !
Don't think you're smarter, 'cos you're *not* !

Graham

 

[Pooh Bear]

Skybuck Flying wrote:

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445C787D.364ABCFA@hotmail.com...


Skybuck Flying wrote:

The specs for the harddisks are in the 300+ MB/sec range though.


Nope

Bullshit. It's a YUP. Do some research next time ok ?

Here are the specs:

http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/support/7k500/7k500.htm

Read the SATA section.

Which part of " Sustained data rate (MB/sec) 64.8 - 31 " don't you
understand ?

The interface speed has relatively little to do with the drive's actual
practical ablity to transfer data.

Then what does it have to do with ?

The interface speed needs to be faster than the real data transfer rate ( the
important spec ) or it would become a 'bottleneck'. The data transfer rate
would then be limited by the interface, so interfaces are always faster than
the drive *really* is to stop this happening.

You need to learn how to read a spec !

I am just seeing if you stupid enough to fall for it =D

You haven't the first clue what you're talking about.

Typical dumb kid who reckons he's smart. Do you wear a baseball cap backwards
too ?

Graham

 

[Pooh Bear]

Craig Sutton wrote:

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:445C7911.61713B63@hotmail.com...

51 MB/sec is exactly what you might expect from the spec ! You need to
learn
something about how hard drives work !

Actually that reading is rather poor. I wonder if in all his fiddling with
settings if he has stuffed something up.

Anyway if he's so concerned with the hd speed he should be using raid mode.

He probably doesn't know what it is.

Graham ( a pair of raid drives here btw )