• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by [ETA]MrSpadge

  1. [ETA]MrSpadge

    WD RED spinning at different speeds.

    It's been said for a while that Reds and other higher grade drives have vibration compensation built in. But I never heard what this actually is. An interesting question, for sure! MrS
  2. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Alternative to 2TB WD Black?

    Doesn't Seagate have some emulation solution to work around the 4k sector problem on old OS's? If have never even tried to use it, though. If Hiren XP sees the drive just fine, it should be able to work under your XP. BTW: I don't know how complex your software installation is, but considering the time you have to spend for all this "fiddling around XP" you might be able to install under a new OS in the same time. Personally I found that reinstalls tend to take less time under newer OS's, simply because they bring more features with them, so I need to take manual care of less stuff. Plus the interface and navigation are much quicker for me.. but that's also the result of "forgetting how to XP". MrS
  3. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Is this Samsung 843T a good buy?

    Looks like they're too cheap for eMLC. MrS
  4. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Alternative to 2TB WD Black?

    If you already have the Black and it's clear that at some point you have to upgrade anyway, it seems logical to upgrade the OS first and then use the Black. BTW: if you're reinstalling anyway you might as well transition your OS to an SSD. A 128 GB Crucial MX100 can be had for 60€/$ now, the 256 GB model hovers around the 90€/$ mark. Both are really good value and should take some performance pressure out of your HDD choice, as you can put some of the more critical things (active working set etc.) on the SSD. If you do it this way you could even keep both OS in parallel for some time for a smooth transition. MrS
  5. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Samsung 850 pro or Crucial Mx100?

    I'd choose the MX100 due to the price advantage. The Samsung is a great drive, but you won't feel much of a difference. The MX100 also brings some limited Acronis license with it, which you can use to migrate your current installation (Samsung has this as well). If 256 GB is enough for you feel free to go with the smaller drive for now and pocket the difference. You can always buy something bigger much cheaper in a few years. And you can use your current HDD in an external enclosure for bulk storage. Regarding the RAM: 12 GB is a lot and only you can tell if having more will help you. Also keep in mind that running out of RAM is not as bad with a SSD, as it doesn't cripple your system as it used to do with an HDD. So I agree: "start with the SSD and see where that gets you." MrS
  6. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Changing SSD from Crucial MX100 to Samsung 850 PRO

    That Raid0 could be sweet if you create a small Raid1 partition for the system and use the remaining space in Raid0. However, transitioning a system from non-Raid to Raid is not trivial. Especially if you'd reuse one of the disks. If you're looking for a sigle-disk upgrade which could make a difference wait for M.2 SSDs with PCIe interface. MrS
  7. Buy 2 of them. Should match tapatalking supersonic MrS
  8. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Seagate Desktop SSHD Review Discussion

    Yes: the Black is always expensive To be fair, the mechanical platform of the Black may actually be superior enterprise-grade, as well as the 5 year warrenty. But for me this wouldn't be worth 30% more. MrS
  9. That's an interesting test, thanks! I'm wondering, tough, if the latency score wouldn't make more sense if you included 2 significant sigits rather than 1. I find it unlikely that the difference between 12 cores @ 2.7 GHz and 10 cores @ 3.0 GHz is really a factor of 2.5. BTW: Brian, I had sent you a PM some time ago. It's still marked as "Not yet read". I hope that's not intentional MrS
  10. There are more important differences between 4 and 6 TB drives to consider - The 4 TB models should be cheaper to buy (less price per TB) - The 4 TB models will use more electricity for the same capacity. It's not much, but it adds up, depending on your config and local electricity price. - The 6 TB models will stay useful for longer. If you choose 4 TB now and quickly run out of space again (I don't know your storage needs), you may have to sell / repurpose the 4 TB models and upgrade. There's always some loss associated with selling used hardware. In such a case it might have been better to go for fewer larger disks now. MrS
  11. Regarding the partitioning: it doesn't hurt technically. The SSD won't care about it. The question is: what do you gain by doing it and what do you lose? The 2nd question is easy to answer: flexibility. I imagine you're buying a very expensive 1 TB SSD because you will need the space. However, once you fill up the 500 GB data partition and still have space left on the system drive, you'll bite yourself in the *** that you didn't make the data partition larger. Likewise, if you make the system partition smaller and fill it up you're in trouble again and have to resort to time-consuming disk clean-up, moving programs etc. Assuming your data is worth something it should be backed up anyway. In this case I see no problem with going with a big 1 TB partition for OS and data. Unless you're reinstalling the OS monthly.. but in this case you're doing something horribly wrong Another option would be to buy 2 x 512 GB SSDs instead of a single large one. They'll hardly cost more. If your mainboard and case can take it, you could make e.g. a 100 GB Raid 1 partition for the OS (or whatever you like) and use the remaining 800 GB in Raid 0 for massive throughput. I know the Intel chipset Raid and Microsoft Software Raid let you do this. The increased risk of loosing data in a Raid 0 shouldn't be a problem since you'd have a recent backup of your valuable data on the HDD anyway. Heck, you could even extend this to 4 x 256 GB SSDs without paying much more. BTW: in this case page and scratch file might be best placed in the Raid 0 as well. Also make sure to check the performance of your 120 GB SSD. Depending on the model it might be significantly less than the 1 TB you're planing to buy and could hurt your overall performance. In this case it could still be used as a nice system drive for a somewhat old laptop or so. MrS
  12. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Opinion on Toshiba 3.5" HDDs?

    Any drive is Raid capable Some are a bit more specialized, though. Features for Raid, which much more expensive drives have, are: vibration compensation for many-drive installations and a short "error timeout", so that the drive will not try to read some sector for as long as regular consumer drives. Instead it just fails and lets the Raid controller get the data from another drive. Otherwise Raid controllers would think the drive has gone bad and will drop it from the array, claiming it to be defective. It sounds really stupid that even after 30+ years of HDD and protocol experience the Raid controller can still not distingush between a searching drive and a faulty one. Or to simply interrupt such a lengthy "bad sector retrieval". So basically if you buy an expensive Raid drive, all you pay for is a different parameter setting in the firmware. MrS
  13. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Opinion on Toshiba 3.5" HDDs?

    Running 2 of the 500 GB, 7.2k rpm Toshibas at work. So far they have been pretty unremarkable, which is good for a solid work-horse drive. One exception is this: one of them is actually my desktop HDD now, cached by a 60 GB Agility III using SRT in full performance mode. The setup is pretty much the same I was using before with a 640 GB Black (died) and a Seagate Desktop 3 TB at home. The strange thing about the Toshiba: when transferring sequential data over USB 2 at a modest 30 MB/s the HDD is already maxed out, leaving the system in a very unresponsive state. It's strange, the HDD should easily handle this, but it has happened twice so far. MrS
  14. I do not understand what this media cache is. Is it parts of the platters dedicated to caching the platter accesses (which wouldn't make all that much sense, unless your file system is horribly fragmented) or is it a flash cache? MrS
  15. I think his comment was not completely serious.. Anyway, this sounds like WDs take on shingled magnetic recording. What other reason could there be to specifically mark this drive as for "cold storage archives"? MrS
  16. [ETA]MrSpadge

    How come my 840 EVO is slower than Vertex 3?

    It could well be that it takes some time to rebuild the prefetch data, i.e. so that Win knows what you're frequently accessing. I'm not a big fan of these "tweaks".. it could well be that they made your OS feel slow. MrS
  17. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Buying a 6TB disk in the UK

    I second that an automatic flash cache of your current hot data in the database is probably the way to go. Any 7.2k rpm HDD will still feel very slow in comparison. There are some dedicated Cache SSDs, or if your mainboard allows you might be able to use Intel SRT. Or maybe the database software itself offers caching.. that could be really smart, but they might charge an arm and a leg for it. MrS
  18. [ETA]MrSpadge

    HDD for general use (3 or 4TB)

    Actually I would recommend the 3TB Seagate ST3000DM001 again. With 1 GB per platter at 7.2k rpm it's still a very strong performer in the world of desktop HDDs. From the benchmarks I see I would say its firmware is a bit more balanced all around compared to Toshiba and HGST. The WD Black and Blue also have very solid firmware, but the Black is ridiculously expensive (for my taste) and they pretty much quit the Blue line by stopping at 1 TB. MrS
  19. [ETA]MrSpadge

    Seagate 8TB HDD Now Shipping Discussion

    To be fair they're not claiming this would ship in mass quantities to end user stores. I concur with Brian in that it's probably SMR and by "support for archive workloads" they actually mean "don't try to use this for anything else than archive workloads". By "consistent enterprise-class performance" they probably mean "it's always slow". If it was any better than this they surely would have said so. That's not to say the drive wouldn't have its place.. but I think it may actually be good to limit their availability for now. BTW: it's no excuse, but Seagate has been soft-launchnig drives for years. Sometime retail availability took a full year! I see no reason to get any more tired of this than in the past years. MrS
  20. [ETA]MrSpadge

    SanDisk Ultra II SSD Announced Discussion

    Calling a value TLC drive "Ultra" is pretty retarded - how to improve over this? Super and mega are clearly below. "Titan" worked well for nVidia Besides this it looks like a fine drive. MrS
  21. [ETA]MrSpadge

    AMD Radeon R7 Series SSD Review Discussion

    I wish AMD would have done something special if they put their name onto an SSD. Like giving us an affordable M.2 value drive. MrS
  22. [ETA]MrSpadge

    OCZ ARC 100 SSD Review Discussion

    Valleyforge, it's totally OK for you to mistrust OCZ until proven otherwise, and it's totally OK for you not to buy and recommend their products. But claiming this SSD would be a terrible product just because it's from OCZ is not OK - unguilty until proven otherwise. BTW: the controller and basic firmware of this drive have been in service for quite some time in other product(s?) now, so it's not something completely new and unknown. CrazyElf, I'd say that OCZ failures were even more severe with Sandforce 1 rather than 2. But that doesn't matter any more. And regarding your outlook: I see no reason why "budget" drives wouldn't transition over to M.2 as well, once the controller and mainboards are established. They may not need it for write performance, but reads could certainly make use of the additional bandwidth. They even save money on the PCB and case (none for M.2). Regarding QLC: there would be dimishing gains (at best 33% more capacity than TLC, in practice less than that) at amplified cost (16 states to distinguish instead of 8 for TLC). If it's even going to happen it probably needs 3D-NAND and would be used in SD cards etc. at first. We might see phase change memory (PCM) take over before this becomes reality... it's been promised since a few yeras, but recently Hitachi actually showed a very high performing prototype. Forget about that nonsense of PCM replacing DRAM, but replacing NAND is something it could do very well. Oh and what the ARC offers over MX100 and Evo? If it's not price I still consider the exceptionally high write performance at 128 GB as an outstanding feature. MrS
  23. [ETA]MrSpadge

    OCZ ARC 100 SSD Review Discussion

    The 120 GB version seems to have exceptionally strong write performance and might be significantly faster than the similarly sized MX100 etc. MrS
  24. A few years ago Google publiished a long-term study on their HDD failures, involving several 100000 desktop class disks. There was no correlation between failure rate and temperature below 50°C. Higher than that made them suffer measureably. MrS
  25. It's an offer: +1 year warrenty and vibration sensors + compensation for 30$. It may not always be a good deal (personally I have recommended the Seagate 5.9k rpm over the Red or Green for bulk data storage with a small number of drives), but it's more than just marketing. MrS