hungry_dude

Member
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About hungry_dude

  • Rank
    Member
  1. There are also some Xp "services" that will continuously read/write to the hard drive. You can boost disk, as well as overall system performance by disabling most of them. Go to: http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm There is a GREAT guide on what to disable, plus some "auto service disable" registry patches you can download.
  2. hungry_dude

    SIS IDE Gives Friggin' Weird Benchmarks...

    It's gotta be a glitch, just like the ATTO scores. If that Winbench score isn't a glitch, everyone should be running out and buying Sis IDE controllers RIGHT NOW :wink:
  3. hungry_dude

    SIS IDE Gives Friggin' Weird Benchmarks...

    It would be OUTSTANDING if that business winmark was real, but I'm betting that it isn't. I figure that it's probably the same problem causing the high winmark that's causing the ATTO. :cry: Maybe, as someone else mentioned, a caching problem???
  4. hungry_dude

    Which 80GB ide drive

    From what I've read, there are two main choices: Maxtor 6Y080P0 or Western Digital 800JB. The Maxtor drive benches a little faster, but the WD has a 3 year warranty(Maxtor has 1 year warranty). Personally, I went with the 800JB.
  5. hungry_dude

    SIS IDE Gives Friggin' Weird Benchmarks...

    So, are you saying that the rapidly spinning platters of my hard drive are throwing off chronoton particles? Oops, I failed the geek check :wink: Yeah, I'm under no delusion that I'm actually getting that kind of speed I'm just trying to figure out what the driver glitch is. In your VIA board, was performance still good despite the glitch? Were your "high end winmark" scores accurate(as mine seem to be)?
  6. Anyone ever hear of an IDE driver completely screwing up benchmarks, but otherwise giving good performance? I installed a new Sis IDE driver for my K7S5A motherboard, now some benchmarks are returning ridiculously high(incorrect) results on my WD800JB. Look at my ATTO: 500MB/sec read speed? My business disk winmark gives me over 18,000, when StorageReview only got 10,100 on the same drive. BTW: Hdtach shows normal, expected results.
  7. hungry_dude

    SIS IDE Gives Friggin' Weird Benchmarks...

    Well, that made the write speeds normal, but maximum read speed went up even more. Now, ATTO says I'm getting 505MB a sec! Also, this doesn't explain why I'm getting an 18 business winmark when StorageReview only got a 10. Has anyone ever heard of an IDE driver causing ridiculously high, incorrect benchmarks? Here's the new ATTO:
  8. I was on here yesterday complaining about how my WD800JB didn't do very well on Winbench tests. Well, today I installed a new Sis IDE driver for my motherboard and things are REALLY weird now. My scores are 30.8 on the high-end winmark(about normal) and, get this, 18.4 on the business winmark! WTF is going on? There's NO way I'm getting nearly twice what Storage Review got on the same drive! Weirdest of all, this new driver makes ATTO go batshit. Just look at this pic: Gee, I didn't know a 800jb was capable of 500MB a sec So, what's going on here? BTW: Hdtach scores are normal and within expected range for this drive.
  9. hungry_dude

    Why Does My Winbench99 Score Suck?

    To be honest, I don't think that honold and I are having the same problem. Look at his ATTO scores vs. mine. His write scores are very low, where as all of my ATTO scores look pretty much normal. The problem I am having doesn't effect throughput(read or write) at all. It just effects random access scores, which are probably even MORE important for everyday applications than throughput. honold: Have you tried taking out one of your RAID drives and just testing a single drive? If so, what were your results?
  10. hungry_dude

    Why Does My Winbench99 Score Suck?

    Thanks for the feedback. I'm clueless on all this "drive benchmark" stuff(obviously :wink: ) . So, system configuration can effect disk scores? I'm running XP with only 256MB of RAM(fairly low-end for XP). I notice that the StorageReview testbed uses 512 MB of RAM. Could this make that much difference in my Winbench scores? Am I likely to see any benefit by adding 256MB more?
  11. hungry_dude

    Why Does My Winbench99 Score Suck?

    Arrrrgh. Just Winbenched again and it's even lower 6,830 and 21,000. What could cause a disk to have poor random access, even though throughput is great? Controller?
  12. hungry_dude

    Why Does My Winbench99 Score Suck?

    Frankly, I'm tempted to blame this. No post that mentions Sandra deserves serious consideration.. Aw c'mon. I threw it in as an after-thought, after all. I know that everyone says that Sandra sucks, but I didn't have any other test results(other than more throughput tests). So Winbench is only reliable with a fresh format? Are you saying that it must be run on a drive with no programs installed whatsoever? Even Windows? Frank: Drive was freshly defragged before each test. Drive total formatted size 74.5GB, with 69GB free. I just installed Windows XP on this drive yesterday. Here's the defrag map: Thanks for taking the time to help, guys. While I'm at it, here's the results from ATTO and Hdtach as well. As you can see, throughput looks good... I think :?: :wink: :
  13. Hi, I just bought a new WD 800JB. I ran it through all the popular benchmarks and, while my scores seem normal in throughput tests, they seem to suck donkeys in "application" tests. Here are my Winbench99 scores vs. what StorageReview got on the same drive: Business Winmark: SR: 10,100 me: 7,240 High-end Winmark: SR: 35,000 me: 24,000 Read Transfer/Begin: SR: 49.3MB/s me: 49.2MB/s Read Transfer/End SR: 29.2MB/s me: 29.2MB/s As you can see, my transfer rates are right on, but WHAT's up with my Winmarks? Could this be my controller? A Windows XP problem? Just a bad drive? BTW:My Sandra test is horrible, too: 27,379kB/s
  14. There are two versions of Winbench 99. Winbench 99, v1.1 ,and a newer version, Winbench 99 v1.2 I think StorageReview uses version 1.1, but I'm not sure...
  15. Oh, and also: What version of Winbench 99 is used for the results on STorage Review, 1.1 or 1.2?