HDTach...are these results alright?

P

Payne

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
65
2000335704011636610_rs.jpg


Are these results too low? I'm using the P5BDeluxe board.
Intel Matrix Storage Console says that the drive is running in Gen2 mode...and NCQ support says "yes".
Reason why I'm asking is because I've read that I should be getting around ~240mB/s for burst speeds...any recommendations on how to increase this if it is infact low?
Help appreciated.
 
I got this result:
hdtachresultqa3.jpg


That's with the latest AHCI drivers on a P5B Deluxe and NCQ enabled. Don't know if it makes any difference. Atleast I didn't notice any when I ran my drives in IDE mode.
 
Payne said:
Reason why I'm asking is because I've read that I should be getting around ~240mB/s for burst speeds...any recommendations on how to increase this if it is infact low?
Click to expand...

The burst speed is perhaps the least influential factor in drive performance. Don't worry about it.

When taking screenshots of a single application, try alt+printscreen. I don't know if it works in Vista, but I would imagine it does. It just captures the application in the foreground.
 
unhappy_mage said:
When taking screenshots of a single application, try alt+printscreen. I don't know if it works in Vista, but I would imagine it does. It just captures the application in the foreground.
Click to expand...
It works in Vista just as well. Using PNG or GIF compressed images for charts such as the ones above will also increase the image quality and prevent the hideous artifacts to show up around text. Sure, JPG is a great algorithm, but it is designed for photographs, whereas PNG and GIF have other strengths.
 
Rudd said:
I got this result:
hdtachresultqa3.jpg


That's with the latest AHCI drivers on a P5B Deluxe and NCQ enabled. Don't know if it makes any difference. Atleast I didn't notice any when I ran my drives in IDE mode.
Click to expand...

What OS are you running?
I'm also running HDTach in XP compatibility mode since it doesn't work in Vista.
 
HDTach 3 works just fine under Vista, both 32 bit and 64 bit versions. Not sure what problems other people might have getting it working, but it's what I use for baseline testing after I install the OS and it's never not worked under Vista for me.

Interesting that some people are having issues...
 
seems ok to me heres mine for comparison

2x80GB SATA Caviar SE drives in RAID 0 this is my OS Drive, at first i bench it shows around 320mb/s then i bench again - result.= 1847 mb/s cache read. 103mb/s not bad for cheap 80 giggers i think .
HDTach2x80WDCaviarSERAID0.jpg
[/IMG]
I have an OEM WD SATA Raptor 160GB drive I use for my Swap file and Data (my documents) Drive I get this. around 76 mb/s ( thats so-so for a raptor i think.:mad:
HDTachWDSATARaptor160GB.jpg
[/IMG]
Lastly I have a WD SATA Caviar SE 160GB/16 as a backup drive I get this. around 53's mb/s thats normal i think.
HDTachWDSATACaviarSE160GB.jpg
 
1.8GB/s burst? Something is quite wrong with that, unless you magically have like 6 SATA II drives tied together in a RAID someplace (6x300MB/s = 1.8GB theoretical burst).

You're posting to say HDTach should be fine and working right yet the very pic you post of just 2 80GB drives in RAID shows nearly 2GB/s burst speeds... even running the test multiple times wouldn't affect the cached burst speeds quite that dramatically. Something is way wrong there.

Am I the only one that notices that's like, way way wrong? :)
 
aww thats just a cache read. --. first time out it usually reads around - 275 - 325 mbs/s, bench a second time and it now reads over 1700-1850 mbs!! LOL :eek: isnt this what happens to all of you?

anywho... what is reallly important i hear is the average read speed, thats @ 103 mb/s which is just ok for raid zero with 2x 80 GB 8mn cache drive :p
 
And is entirely believable for 2x80GB drives, sure. But I've never seen HDTach read such high burst rates, and I've been using it since it was created years ago. Guess it's just a glitch in your case, I really can't say why it would show such a high transfer rate. Regardless, as long as it's working, so be it. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top