ClearCloud8

Member
  • Content count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ClearCloud8

  • Rank
    Member
  1. @CryptoJenkins @coindesk Hahahah

  2. @dereksfoster99 It’s probably not overpriced even now. Imagine in a couple of months once it is at 30,000

  3. RT @bitstein: Bitcoin is almost $13k. @lightning tested on mainnet. Futures markets open over the next few weeks. Confidental Transactio…

  4. RT @egg_descrambler: https://t.co/IjorwxroTH

  5. RT @StartaleTV: The dinosaurs went extinct cause they all shorted $BTC.

  6. RT @PeterLBrandt: Blowing through resistance on a log graph -- in 42 years of trading I have NEVER seen anything like this. $BTC $btcusd #B…

  7. RT @chasethisnow: A 'Big Four' accounting firm is accepting bitcoin payments https://t.co/cpe2M9JBok https://t.co/mamPyQJSZI @businessinsid…

  8. Going nowhere fast. @ Montenegro https://t.co/fhnsFoAjex

  9. This is an #Irish #gym, verified by the presence of a keg in center of room. #Ireland #workout #beer #lift #travel https://t.co/wYblvP1bRL

  10. I went ahead and decided it return the Rev 2 HDD. (It would have been a net cost of $120 after eBaying the Rev 1 HDD.) Thank you all for your feedback -- I do appreciate it. By the way, my main reason for caring about performance on my computer is for Video Editing. I am using Adobe Premiere CS6. My setup is like so: OS: Windows 8 x64 CPU: Intel® Core i7 CPU 870 @ 2.93GHz RAM: 16 GB Mobo: P55-USB3 Video: nVidia GeForce GTX 660 Hard Drive Setup: C: SSD - Samsung 840 Pro 256GB D: HDD - WD Black 4TB rev 1 (this is the one i was going to replace with rev 2) X: Raid 0 Striping - 2 WD HDDs - 1TB each (7200 rpm) Y: HDD - Seagate - smaller drive around 500 GB or so (7200 rpm) My usage of the drives: C: OS D: All my personal files. This is where I drop media (footage I have filmed) as well. Project file for Premiere is here too. X: This is where I point Premiere to for my scratch disks and Media files, Media database, etc. Y: This is an smaller extra drive I don't care about - I figured I would just use to render my final OUTPUT to with Premiere. Anyway... I want to have all my video source files sitting on D. This is the HDD I back up regularly to another location. This should be all the files I care about. That's why this one is 4 TB. I want it to house all my files, plus the fact that a lot of the video files I record are pretty large. I figured if I could get a little more performance out of D:.... then that would help Premiere.... because I have watched it in Resource Monitor and I can see it is accessing D: quite a bit when I am previewing in Premiere to decide where to cut in and out of various clips and when I am moving the current play location around with the mouse... so I can skim around and see different parts of the video quickly. MrSpadge: You mentioned putting the pagefile on the SSD. I believe the pagefile is already there by default since that is where I am running my OS.
  11. Yes, my point was that (if anything) the 1st gen HDD already having 1TB full of data would only give the 2nd gen HDD an advantage. I would either expect the 2nd gen HDD to show really good improvements, or really REALLY good improvements. However what I saw was what seemed to be very similar performance between the two. For what it's worth I went ahead and used Acronis to clone the contents of the 1st gen HDD to the 2nd gen. I re-ran the tests and the 2nd gen ran marginally slower than it did when it was empty. So, not very surprising. As far as my computer's specs, I don't see how that is very important. I am comparing apples to apples.... because of the fact I am testing both HDDs on my computer. I am not comparing results across different computers with different specs. From what the original article said I expected a large performance boost between gen 1 HDD and gen 2 HDD. This was not the case when I tested them both.... holding all other variables constant (my computer). But yes you are correct that my box isn't a dedicated benchmark setup.... so there could have been background services running. However, I ran the tests twice on each HDD. And I re-ran the tests again after I cloned the HDD's contents as well. I am not seeing any significant differences. (So I doubt my results are due to background processes.) Thanks for the recommendations on software I could try. I am half curious about doing further investigations..... and half ready to just call it a day and return this new 2nd Gen HDD to Amazon. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll give that a shot....... and the results are in. I ran the test as you suggested using short strokes of 100GB. I am surprised though.... it actually shows that the 1st Gen model is a little bit FASTER than the 2nd Gen model in the random read access mode. What the heck! As far as the standard benchmark mode.... it looked the same. A 14% improvement for throughput. But I was hoping to get the improvements shown in the article in regard to random access IOPS. I figure random access would be more like my typical usage on the computer. (I can post the screenshots if you want.) I'm not particularly concerned with comparing SSDs with HDDs here. Even if many of the highest gains were still under 100 IOPS... the key thing I am trying to focus in on here is the difference shown in performance between Gen 1 and Gen 2 of this HDD. That is what I was hoping to replicate when I purchased this HDD. I do have a SDD as my main OS drive. The purpose of this other drive is to store my media. But.... that's kind of beside the point here.... which is why I'm not getting such strong differences in performance between WD's 4TB Black Gen 1 and Gen 2. I think you might be right about queue depths. It's too bad HDTune doesn't have an option for configuring that.... ... I might have to try some of the other software mentioned...... (sigh) Sounds right on the STR part. In regards to the random access.... I realize I wasn't getting the same levels of IOPS as in SR's review.... but I had hoped that when comparing rev 1 with rev 2... on my computer..... they would at least show some kind of marked improvement. However.... as you and another guy have mentioned..... it could be this queue depth. I don't know too much about queue depth, but after some brief googling.... I imagine in a real world scenario I probably would have a good deal of queue depth.... HDD operations waiting in some queue to be executed.... giving the firmware a chance to shine at optimization. I am going to try your suggestion of running the file benchmark test (HD tune doesn't have a web server test that I could see) ..... just give me a minute..... thanks for your patience. So in this File Benchmark test I did see the Rev 2 performing a lot better than Rev 1. At least there is that! :-) (if you want I can post the screenshots on this too.) I have a SSD too.... just hoping to have a nice fast HDD to store the majority of my media. And it helps for video editing to have a little bit faster HDD performance when reading in some of the assets. (Yes I know I can do RAID to get better performance..... but I am working within my cost boundaries. And yes I have multiple hard drives in use for scratch disk, etc..)
  12. Yes... after reading this article.... which said: This time around, the WD4003FZEX doesn't get WD any higher capacity, but it does boast some aggressive performance claims. "WD figures performance gains of anywhere between 26%-48% depending on the capacity thanks to an improved dual-core processor and other controller and firmware improvements."..... It seemed like it would be worth it. I could sell the 1st gen on eBay and upgrade to this one.... get some significant performance gains. It didn't seem like just "a handful of IOPS".... Not to mention, my tests showed almost exactly the same amount of IOPS on both 1st and 2nd gen drives.... which really sucks IMHO. You said HDTune is not a good way to compare storage devices..... do you have a better suggestion I can run? (Also keep in mind I am just a novice in terms of benchmarking HDDs.... not something I plan on doing regularly.... so I don't want to spend money buying a really expensive bench marking suite I will only ever use once....)
  13. I just got this HDD tonight.... and I am incredibly disappointed. Almost no improvement over the previous model. Check out my blog post: http://sheblindedmewithcomputerscience.blogspot.com/2013/11/new-wd-black-4tb-hdd-wd4003fzex-not.html
  14. Man those worms squirming around for the survivor food challenge were disgusting. Love Tyson's reaction. #whoshungry