Hitachi 7K200 in RAID 0 hdtune results

Someone PM'ed me asking for the test results of my 7K200 Raid array in my Voodoo.

So here it is:



How impressive is that

Yeah 200MB/sec average.

The power of Hitachi

K-TRON

 

That is impressive.

 

that is impressive indeed.

 

Good Lord!!!

 

LOL, this is a joke right?

Either you fabricated the result or you bought some RAID controller from the year 3000AD. I don't know what type of raid controller your laptop uses, but here are some suspicious pts.

• The max sequential transfer rate for 7K200 is 71.5MB/sec. Two HDD in raid should give 175% peformance. Not 300% performance.
• Most raid controller doesn't allow S.M.A.R.T to be read in Windows. So, you can't read HDD temp once in an array.
• The access time for 7K200 is around 14ms. When you in raid, you should have higher access time due to multiple HDDs. 5.9ms? that is more like 15K rpm SCSI disk

 

No joke, this is what my laptop scores in hdtune. I have run it several times, and it gived me very similar benchmarks.



K-TRON

 

http://www.storagereview.com/HTS722020K9A00.sr?page=0,1

read it.

 

I will reinstall hdtune and see what happens.

K-TRON

 

reinstalled hdtune

here is a screenshot




K-TRON

 

I'm also baffled by such good results. Perhaps HDTune gets confused by RAID setups.

Can we have a second opinion using SiSoftware Sandra's physical disk and file system benchmarks? There's also HDTach (but it doesn't work with Vista).

John

 

I tried the Sandra physical disk benchmark, but this is all I get:



It says Read Error. Drive Access Error.
Also Sandra picks my harddrives up and says that they are in SCSI

I will try hdtach soon

K-TRON

 

Ok Here is the HDTACH results. I just ran the test about a minute ago.



It still picks up the disks with an average of 205.2 MB/sec
It also says the burst speed is 448MB/sec

K-TRON

 

Ok, so I just ran the long run version of hdtach, and I still get similar results:




I guess I just have awesome harddrives. Whatever it is VIA's K8T890CE Chipset is amazing.

K-TRON

 

Its not a joke at all. I recently got SSD tests from memoright for a RAID configuration which pushes above 380mb/s...4 x 16GbSSD @ RAID 0

Attached.

 

Finally someone who believes.

Wow I never thought that the SSD harddrives would be that fast.

I really am anticipating that the Gigabyte iRam I ordered will be as fast.

K-TRON

 

There are other tests around with the Mtron that put a dual raid around 300Mb/s. The problem with a configuration such as this however, as nice as the speed is, is data security. Lose one and they are both useless.

Its like ripping a 5 dollar bill in half and putting each half in a separate pocket. Neither piece is any good if you lose one of the halves.

 

Yeh but that 380 is a RAID for 4 drives which adds up. The Dual Hitachis' don't add up. It seems like it's running in some sort of buffer. The numbers are there but they don't add up.

From all the reviews of the 7K200 those benches are just too fast. It's faster than 2 Mitrons.

 

Question: Will the Travelstar 7K200 work on my E1705?

Just wondering cause my 100GB 5400rpm HDD is just too slow for me.

 

What is your stripe size?

 

Yes, the Travelstar 7K200 will work in your E1705. There are four 7K200's, the 100gb, 120gb, 160gb and 200gb.

The high density of the drive and its higher rpm should speed things up a bit for you. Dont worry to much on loss of battery life, as the 7K200 only uses 800mah, which is considerably low for a 7200rpm mobile harddrive.

K-TRON

 

My stripe size, which is set in my raid bios is either 64kb or auto. I cant remember.

K-TRON

 

These benchmarks have nothing to do with real-world results. Just pick a large file (1GB or more), copy it around and measure the time (with your watch). The time you get when you copy out of a RAID partition is the read time, what you copy in to the RAID partition gives you the write time. Divide the size of the data (in MB) by the time it takes to copy the file (in sec) and you have the real-world data transfer (MB/sec).

What is yours? Mine is less than 50% of what the benchmark gives.

EDIT: oh yeah, I forgot to mention to use RAM disk as the target drive