April 7, 2009 at 4:09 pm #48534
Nice LD-Are those 7k or 10k speed hdd’s? I am curious.
Mine are 7200 rpm I believe.April 7, 2009 at 4:43 pm #48535
Nice LD-Are those 7k or 10k speed hdd’s? I am curious.
Mine are 7200 rpm I believe.
just standard 7.2k. 32MB cache, i think. nothing fancy. im not sure what those regular troughs are about.
thats actually the first time i benchmarked those ones. seeing the peaks and troughs, i thought id try a bios update (’cause it didnt look right). strange thing, i updated to the latest bios – and disk performance seems to have dropped to about 70% what it was. suddenly the bus/chipset (something) seems to be maxing at about 140MBs, with a straight line on max disk speed right up to about 80% of the array.
its annoying, but very interesting. its a sucky asus motherboard (i know), which prob has something to do with it. im currently trying to revert to the old bios, but it wont let me! ‘king thing. ‘bios is too old, apparently!
what i need is a universal bios flashing utility for windows
ill post again if i manage to find a solution without breaking the motherboard.April 7, 2009 at 4:47 pm #48536
Thanks LD-Bah…sorry about your Bios trouble-I have a bit of time on my hands-I will help to try & find a solution for you also;)April 7, 2009 at 5:06 pm #48537
i just tried flashrom in debian, but it doesnt support the chipset. last resort, ill have to dig out an optical drive and emulate a floppy dos startup disk on a dvd. oh nostalgia, what is your hold? maybe i can bittorrent an old episode of friends while i wait for it to write – get into that retro turn of the millennium spirit.
hours of funApril 7, 2009 at 5:39 pm #48538
Hey LD-I may have an idea(s)-1)Pull the backup battery out/reinstall. . . .It may revert to the old bios. Do you have any utilities in the M/B basic settings or jumpers that maybe can reset it? I know, pretty basic stuff-Just trying to help =P~
ASUS CrashFree BIOS2
“The CrashFree BIOS2 feature now includes the BIOS auto-recovery function in a support CD. Users can reboot their system through the support CD when a bootable disk is not available, and go through the simple BIOS auto-recovery process.
Phoenix or Award Bios?
http://www.zaperrors.com/?t202id=111728&t202kw=bios&gclid=CIjEqoud35kCFYZM5Qod3n84YAApril 7, 2009 at 6:30 pm #48539
hi. thanks. the bios isnt corrupt. i suspect its just a shit release. the problem is that the built in bios update tools and the asus windows update wont allow me to flash with an earlier version than the one in use. i should be able to use a dos utility to revert to the old version.
you have given me an idea. if all else fails, i may be able to intentionally corrupt the bios and make use of crashfree. (does sound a bit scary, but could work)
thanks for the linksApril 8, 2009 at 4:28 am #48540
Hello Vike, Laps,
Check this out. I dunno whether cpu usage is a factor or not in benchmarking the hdd, but for the SSD marks, one is with a higher cpu usage…
But I noticed if you were doing some downloading at the same time as running HD Tune, (especially if there was some file transferring running in the background), there would be a slight dip in the results. The first one is on my RAID-0 7200 WD’s, the other two is from my single Intel SSD, 2 runs done, one with a slightly higher cpu usage.April 8, 2009 at 11:11 am #48541
nice. solid state’s where it’s at then. i didnt realise sata ssd’s had come quite that far. 200MBs from a single drive!
drives like that are still £300+ here. you could go 4 width 7,200 for that money, have a 2TB array and still have enough left over for a cpu upgrade and couple of GBs of ramApril 8, 2009 at 4:26 pm #48542
Hello Raden-very nice indeed=Props =D>April 10, 2009 at 8:15 am #48543
@laptops Daddy wrote:
ill post again if i manage to find a solution without breaking the motherboard
hi. i fixed the problem. turns out im just slightly inept. who knew?!
the hard drives still had a cap on their restrict to sata 150 pins. i guess the initial bios release had a quirk negating the restriction – fixed in the later ones. so i take it back, this was my fault more than asus.
thanks guys, id never have realised i had a problem without benchmarking. i need to benchmark more. im sure there are tons of problems on my computers that i dont even know about.April 10, 2009 at 10:45 am #48544
Hello Vike, Laps,
Thx. Imagine the possibilities in speed if one were to make a RAID array using SSDs. But like u said Laps, they are still dear at the moment. Btw, what actually did u do to fix the problem u mentioned? Did u have to update your BIOS to a later one? Or was it applying or removal of a jumper?April 10, 2009 at 12:02 pm #48545
Imagine the possibilities in speed if one were to make a RAID array using SSDs. But like u said Laps, they are still dear at the moment. Btw, what actually did u do to fix the problem u mentioned? Did u have to update your BIOS to a later one? Or was it applying or removal of a jumper?
i just hadnt removed the stupid jumper caps.
yes – solid state raid 0 would be awesome. maybe in a few years time : )
theres a potential issue with the total bandwidth made available by the controller (south bridge). i did a quick google search. looks like wed be close to saturation with even 2 width ssd raid 0 (at least with drives like yours).
check this out: intel ssd in raid 0.
also, google for ‘ocz z drive’ (a prebuilt ssd array on a pci express card)
and, check out these esata solid state sticks: http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/flash_drives/ocz_throttle_esata_flash_drive. that one doesnt look much faster than a decent usb stick, but theres def potential in that format for the future.April 10, 2009 at 12:31 pm #48546
Laps, in your latest attachment it seems the burst rate figures are about right, any idea why mine are a bit low?April 10, 2009 at 1:16 pm #48547
…any idea why mine are a bit low?
no, dont know, sorry. its just a benchmark, though. doesnt mean much. id guess maybe burst rates (which are traditionally higher) maybe dont work or apply in the same way on raid 0 and/or ssd.
im a little sketchy on the theory of hd cache and burst rates, tbh (especially in this context – none of the systems we’re comparing here are main stream). ive seen enough reports from different arrays to suggest its probably normal and nothing to worry about. sustained speeds are what count.
something i did notice is that both yours and viks speeds seem slightly lower at the start, which seems slightly odd. probably just the way the different raid controllers work.
linux hdparm -T /array gives me 1400MBs for cached read on that one, which is quite a contrast.April 10, 2009 at 4:51 pm #48548
Very interesting topic-Happy you have your board figured out LD. I always enjoy reading/learning things here in the forums. I was wondering something. . . . .I believe I & Raden (Hlo Raden) have Vista;LD has XP. My Cpu is OC’d to 3.0Ghz but, right now it idles @ 2004.5Ghz (Power saving mode-until my system requires more speed;then it ramps up to 3.0ghz)-Could that account for the delay in performance of which you speak? *This is according to the CPUI V1.50 utility*-My ram mhz seems to stay constant though @ 501mhz x 2.
*I just ran CPU-Z/HDtune while typing this*
I am guessing that I am either bottlenecking with the cpu power saving setting;or, my cpu is not required much for access times/hdd operation?
**Edited** I increased my “Control Panel”/PowerOptions/SelectAPowerPlan” options to High Performance (See results below)-May have to rerun all my benchmarks now=LOL
*Second Edit*-Peaking my interest, I just had to use Google to get more information on the “Power” subject. Re:VISTA Power management:
#Use this for Vista on stationary PC’s or (laptops–>only when benchmarking/plugged into AC/Battery life may suffer) ➡ 2 pages-
#Use this for Laptops (Regular use) ➡
I hope this information can help someone-It sure shed some light on some unknowns for me concerning Vista 😉
What do you think?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.