Lash_sumthin
Offline
Posts: 466
|
 |
« Reply #240 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 12:39:05 » |
|
CPU 5.6 RAM 5.9 Aero Graphics 5.9 Gaming graphics 5.5  HD 5.9 I got the samsung spinpoint id recommend as far as u can distinguish between one and another.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #241 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 12:43:09 » |
|
cheers Lash_sumthin, i think next payday i'll invest in one. Question. i didn't have to format my harddrive when i connected my new motherboard. should i do so to give it a clean bill of health etc or just leave it?  ??
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Lash_sumthin
Offline
Posts: 466
|
 |
« Reply #242 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 12:46:17 » |
|
i personally wouldnt bother especially if u have any number of files on it and will be purchasing a new one in the near future. I don't believe it will give you much benefit IMO. If its not broke dont fix it...
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #243 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 12:47:44 » |
|
cool cheers i'll defo get a new harddive though. the difference in speed from my dell is amazing. well pleased 
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36336
|
 |
« Reply #244 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 12:49:11 » |
|
Hmm do you really need an extra 0.6 vista points?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #245 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 12:53:48 » |
|
will it not make a difference then?
my old harddrive is sata I not sata II
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36336
|
 |
« Reply #246 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 13:52:54 » |
|
Get siSandra software to benchmark your current drive. I have 2 500gb seagate barracudas set up in RAID 0 and they perform at 105mb/s Although I've just read that those drives have a jumper on them that needs removing to get the faster SATA 2 rate as with the jumper it's only sata 1. I will investigate and if successful let you know the difference I did wonder why it was a low index reading. Thought in fact it was a rubbish sata controller on my motherboard.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36336
|
 |
« Reply #247 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 14:16:06 » |
|
Ok I'm being thick and reading the wrong result. The jumper had been removed already, I thought I had done that before My buffered read is 230mb/s, so the limitation of my motherboard is obvious.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #248 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 14:20:15 » |
|
just downloading it now to check.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #249 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 14:23:10 » |
|
my results
SiSoftware Sandra
Benchmark Results Drive Index : 46.63MB/s Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better. Random Access Time : 23ms Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.
Windows Experience Index Current Drive : 5.3 Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Performance Test Status Run ID : WDC WD2500JS-75NCB1 3.5" 250GB (SATA300, 7200rpm, NCQ, 8MB Cache) Platform Compliance : Win32 x86 System Timer : 14.32MHz Use Overlapped I/O : Yes I/O Queue Depth : 4 request(s) Block Size : 1MB
Volume Information Capacity : 232.83GB
Detailed Benchmark Results Speed at position 0% : 42.92MB/s (78%) Speed at position 3% : 54.64MB/s (99%) Speed at position 7% : 55.20MB/s (100%) Speed at position 10% : 54.55MB/s (99%) Speed at position 13% : 44.73MB/s (81%) Speed at position 17% : 52.21MB/s (95%) Speed at position 20% : 54.10MB/s (98%) Speed at position 23% : 53.92MB/s (98%) Speed at position 27% : 52.90MB/s (96%) Speed at position 30% : 52.30MB/s (95%) Speed at position 33% : 52.34MB/s (95%) Speed at position 37% : 51.54MB/s (93%) Speed at position 40% : 52.64MB/s (95%) Speed at position 43% : 52.21MB/s (95%) Speed at position 47% : 50.67MB/s (92%) Speed at position 50% : 49.53MB/s (90%) Speed at position 53% : 47.16MB/s (85%) Speed at position 57% : 49.17MB/s (89%) Speed at position 60% : 46.31MB/s (84%) Speed at position 63% : 45.28MB/s (82%) Speed at position 67% : 46.73MB/s (85%) Speed at position 70% : 44.30MB/s (80%) Speed at position 73% : 42.88MB/s (78%) Speed at position 77% : 42.69MB/s (77%) Speed at position 80% : 39.88MB/s (72%) Speed at position 83% : 39.51MB/s (72%) Speed at position 87% : 38.26MB/s (69%) Speed at position 90% : 35.71MB/s (65%) Speed at position 93% : 35.51MB/s (64%) Speed at position 97% : 33.53MB/s (61%) Speed at position 100% : 32.06MB/s (58%) Random Access Time : 23ms Full Stroke Access Time : 26ms
Physical Disk Model : WDC WD2500JS-75NCB1 Version : 10.02E01 Serial Number : 2020202057202d4443574e41314b363838343637 Interface : SATA Rotational Speed : 7200rpm Removable Drive : No Queueing On : Yes
Performance Tips Notice 5008 : To change benchmarks, click Options. Notice 5004 : Synthetic benchmark. May not tally with 'real-life' performance. Notice 5006 : Only compare the results with ones obtained using the same version! Tip 2 : Double-click tip or press Enter while a tip is selected for more information about the tip.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36336
|
 |
« Reply #250 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 14:29:44 » |
|
Do the file systems benchmark
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #251 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 14:43:41 » |
|
i take it, it takes whille to run?!! :|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36336
|
 |
« Reply #252 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 14:49:29 » |
|
Yes it does
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #253 on: Sunday, February 10, 2008, 16:42:06 » |
|
here we go
SiSoftware Sandra
Benchmark Results Drive Index : 47.85MB/s Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better. Random Access Time : 14ms Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.
Windows Experience Index Current Drive : 5.3 Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Performance Test Status Run ID : WDC WD2500JS-75NCB1 3.5" 250GB (SATA300, 7200rpm, NCQ, 8MB Cache) Platform Compliance : Win32 x86 System Timer : 14.32MHz Operating System Disk Cache Used : No Use Overlapped I/O : Yes I/O Queue Depth : 4 request(s) Test File Size : 3.25GB File Fragments : 1 Block Size : 1MB
Detailed Benchmark Results Buffered Read : 148.67MB/s Sequential Read : 58.64MB/s Random Read : 32.41MB/s Buffered Write : 142.14MB/s Sequential Write : 58.52MB/s Random Write : 28.93MB/s Random Access Time : 14ms
Drive Drive Type : Hard Disk Total Size : 232.82GB Free Space : 156.45GB, 67% Cluster Size : 4kB
Physical Disk Model : WDC WD2500JS-75NCB1 Version : 10.02E01 Serial Number : 2020202057202d4443574e41314b363838343637 Interface : SATA Rotational Speed : 7200rpm Removable Drive : No Queueing On : Yes
Performance Tips Notice 5008 : To change benchmarks, click Options. Notice 5004 : Synthetic benchmark. May not tally with 'real-life' performance. Notice 5006 : Only compare the results with ones obtained using the same version! Notice 5209 : Consider using the Removable Storage/Flash Benchmark for Flash devices. Tip 5202 : Use cache on to measure Windows performance. Tip 2 : Double-click tip or press Enter while a tip is selected for more information about the tip.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magicroundabout
Fanta Pants
Offline
Posts: 8786
|
 |
« Reply #254 on: Monday, February 11, 2008, 09:33:01 » |
|
going by your buffered read and mine i'd say my harddrive is slow.
so i think a faster one is needed
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|