The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    HDTune: burst transfer rate lower than maximum transfer rate

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Poirot8, Sep 20, 2007.

  1. Poirot8

    Poirot8 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Is there a way to fix this?

    [​IMG]
     
  2. allan_huang

    allan_huang Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    25
    Messages:
    1,030
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Run it again
    Something is using your HDD while you are running HDTune, thats why the blue line goes up and down.
    The burst rate varies for me too.
    Look at my 2 pics
    (I have a really slow drive. >:<]
     

    Attached Files:

  3. Les

    Les Not associated with NotebookReview in any way

    Reputations:
    4,706
    Messages:
    5,391
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I was going to sugest the same. if you run things such as sidebar with the clock or any number of things to include the internet, it will create the plunges which are an unreral depiction of the drive
     
  4. Poirot8

    Poirot8 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    That was actually run at startup. I ran it again after waiting around 3 minutes after startup and got roughly the same results as far as transfer rates go. Shouldn't the burst transfer rate always be faster than the maximum transfer rate?

    edit: Ok I ran it again after waiting 5 minutes after startup instead of 3. I was also disconnected from the internet this time.

    [​IMG]

    The transfer rates went up, but the burst transfer rate is still lower than the maximum transfer rate.
     
  5. John Ratsey

    John Ratsey Moderately inquisitive Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,197
    Messages:
    28,841
    Likes Received:
    2,166
    Trophy Points:
    581
    Are you running Vista?

    I attach 3 plots I have just made for my HDD:

    (i) HDTune running under Vista
    (ii) HDTune running under XP
    (iii) HD Tach running under XP

    These are all on the same computer (Zepto 6024W, Intel 965 chipset) with the same HDD.

    You will see that XP is giving a faster burst rate than Vista and HD Tach has a respectable interface burst rate. Unfortunately HD Tach doesn't work with Vista.

    My conclusion is that your HDD is OK and the anguish is being caused by HD Tune + Vista.

    John
     

    Attached Files:

  6. Poirot8

    Poirot8 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Yes, I'm running Vista. I just thought that the burst rate should always be higher than the maximum rate. If this is a normal HDTune result using Vista, then I guess there's no problem.
     
  7. Duchesne

    Duchesne Notebook Geek

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    my harddrive does the same. I cannot get the burst rate above the maximum transfer rate. But I have a hybrid drive, and always assumed it was simply because HDtune could not properly measure hybrid drives.
     
  8. John Ratsey

    John Ratsey Moderately inquisitive Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,197
    Messages:
    28,841
    Likes Received:
    2,166
    Trophy Points:
    581
    I've just run HDtune with an identical WD2500BEVS but in an external enclosure through eSATA. The burst rate is the same as I got with HDtune and internal HDD under XP. So there's something about Vista + HD Tune + internal HDDs which is reducing the (reported) burst speed.

    Anyway, it's not an issue I will lose sleep over. The burst speed only applies to whatever is in the cache, provided it is faster than the HDD transfer rate. And if the poor HDD is having to simultaneously service reads and writes then the performance will drop massively.

    John
     

    Attached Files: