Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/16/17 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    This is the line for full latency, and correct that it is in microseconds: lat (usec): min=211, max=466, avg=267.94, stdev=18.39
  2. 1 point
    Context of what your are testing will help greatly on this.
  3. 1 point
    What are you testing? Also I've never used the -invalidate flag before, what is that used with?
  4. 1 point
    While both are about the same, just make sure that a USB external drive is not your sole backup and when using them on Windows machines use the safe eject to help avoid losing your data in a mishap, I second the motion on HGST drives. I have 20 in two arrays that have been on 24/7 for the past 4 years without a failure. Yup, I know that I just jinxed myself.
  5. 1 point
    If you really want something durable go for an HGST drive. I have 4 of them running non-stop for the last 4 years. But to answer your question, have a look at Blackblaze stats: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-stats-for-2017/ Now, these are NOT consumer drives but these stats pretty much reflect the overall reliability of a drive.
  6. 1 point
    For a single drive sample, they'd be exactly the same, or so close you wouldn't be able to tell.
  7. 1 point
    We haven't heard anything from end user HDD guys in ages. I can't even recall testing one that wasn't some sort of hybrid abomination for a year or more.
  8. 1 point
    This is a little dated but we have a guide on how to do this. http://www.storagereview.com/fio_flexible_i_o_tester_synthetic_benchmark
  9. 1 point
    We're badly overdue. If memory serves, the top 2.5" used to be around 50% the capacity of the top 3.5". That's before 3.5s went to high platter counts. Still, 3TB should be out. The only good news I've seen is in SSDs. After a 3-year stall, there's finally some price movement. Baby steps though, nothing dramatic yet. 2TB and 4TB have dipped below their 2015 prices, everything smaller is still above 2015.
  10. 1 point
  11. 1 point
    From the spec sheet, the drive falls under the same drive acoustic ratings as the 4TB, 6TB, 8TB and 10TB models of the BarraCuda Pro, with a typical idle of 2.8 bels (3.0 idle max), and a typical seek of 3.2 bels (3.4 seek max).
  12. 1 point
    The 03 or 04 part is the series number, it gives an indication of density and possibly power efficiency. Toshiba's 05 series has just hit the markets, with 04 still going strong. 03 is an older design today. I don't know what the G or D stands for.
  13. 1 point
    Good Morning all, im a DBA and shortly envolved in Hardwarepurchases. We are mainly using fujitsu-servers, ordered by some fujitsu-reseller. Now getting a look at the prices i was astonished! In EVERY offer we get the CPU-Prices are WAY above the intel arc recommended customer price. (add 500 - 2000 bucks to the listprice, depending on the exact cpu!!) Is this normal in serverbuisness or is our reseller crappy? Please help the new gui!
  14. 1 point
    STDA4000200 vs. STDA4000100, no idea. However I suspect aside from whatever regulatory paperwork is different between USA and Europe, they are identical. http://www.storagereview.com/seagate_backup_plus_fast_portable_review Shows two Samsung 2TB M9T 2.5" drives inside. Per: http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_spinpoint_m9t_hard_drive_review They smell like conventional PMR drives. There are ample articles, both on Storagereview.com as well as other sites, discussing the difference as you noticed. For reads they appear to be identical, it's only for writes beyond one zone's worth or whatever (25GB I think?) that they get slower. I don't think any SMR-based drives have been around long enough to have a real track record, at least not as far as is visible to end-users. FWIW Seagate does appear to be refining their SMR implementation, performace in the newest drives does look much more consistent. http://www.anandtech.com/show/10335/seagate-innov8-8tb-buspowered-external-hard-drive-review Peformance between the ST3000DM001 (7200rpm, 3.5", PMR), STDR4000100 (5400rpm, 2.5", SMR), STEA4000400 (probably identical to the STDR4000100, probably just less bundled software included as it's part of the lower-end Expansion line vs. the higher-end Backup Plus line) or whatnot, it sounds like you've already read the benchmarks. You don't need us to re-read them to you again. http://www.storagereview.com/seagate_4tb_backup_plus_portable_drive_review http://www.anandtech.com/show/9489/seagate-backup-plus-portable-4tb-usb-30-drive-review Both are a single 2.5" 5400rpm 4TB disk, almost certainly using SMR per reviews. The links above are for the Backup Plus, but you can read the spec sheets on both at Seagate's site, and from the spec sheets they are almost certainly identical hardware inside. I'm not sure exactly what software packages are included with the Expansion drives as I have never used any of the included software with either but IIRC they are lower-end than Backup Plus drives so the software included is less comprehensive.
  15. 1 point
    For USB storage it means the device supports 16 byte commands (so these can be used instead of 10 byte commands, which are limited to 2 TB). Of course, you also need an OS which supports 16 byte commands itself, but it doesn't have to be a 64 bit OS. Something like Windows 7 x86 supports >2TB disks just fine. BTW: You can check for support even without having a drive >2TB available by simply checking if the 16 byte commands are implemented. The reason why you see those "tested capacities" in advertisements, because those resellers don't really have a clue what they sell. They order a container full of some USB gadgets from a Chinese OEM and then "test" what works with it. Fun fact: eSATA never had any capacity limits. I have still have old USB 2.0 docking stations, which work fine with 4 and 6 TB drives using the eSATA ports.
  16. 0 points
    I can't help you guys, just to say - two 9361 (bbu, cachecade, etc) are working fine, I tried DELL and IBM ones, mixed or both DELL, no problems at all. The only change from default settings is that I have disabled BIOS on the cards because I don't need to boot from RAID and it's bit faster. Also, they can be configured thru UEFI bios (bottom of advanced page). If more than one 3961 is installed, UEFI bios nicely lists all of them in advanced page and I can select which one to configure IBM 5210 or DELLs 9361. If it matters my mobo is ASUS Z10PE-D16 WS (dual socket). So problem looks more like mobo configuration than controller issue. Silly to mention but any OEM card can be flashed with firmware from broadcom, maybe they fixed issue by the time? Have you tried ? I flashed IBM and DELL cards with one from broadcom, they work well.
  17. 0 points
    Please explain what you meant reader50.
  18. 0 points
    Hmmm. One detail. I don't need all that power unlike the majority of SUV drivers that need several hundred hp to feel a real man As to the topic, it's just for curiosity's sake. Fuel efficiency doesn't seem to vary that much between a manual and an automatic but an automatic seems so easy. Too bad automatics often cost between €1200 and €2500 more than an equivalent manual and typically they're not available on all versions of a given series. Usually only with the more powerful engines.
  19. 0 points
    BTW francois, what car do you drive? About the only Audi I'd ever consider is an A6 station wagon as the only other station wagon, an A4, is just way too small for what it costs. Like mosts cars from the VW group these days.