• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Thorz

  • Rank
  1. I know this. I have evaluated the risks and the info being backed up there is not critical.
  2. I have bought a Seagate Backup Plus Fast 4TB: It is a fantastic drive. What I was looking for was something portable that could be driven by a single USB port without additional power. The drive came configured as a 4TB humongous MBR disk formatted with NTFS, with 4k sectors. I had to undo this configuration to accommodate my needs (1.5TB HFS+ partition for Time machine backups and a 2.5TB NTFS partition working as a Mac/Windows shared drive. For this I have configured it as a GUID disk. I am wondering: How do they configure this huge disk as MBR with a single 4TB partition? Can this be done with tools like Parted Magic? I did not have the time to test this but am still curious. Thanks.
  3. As something happened and I cannot edit my post anymore I will add some info here: Benchmarking with ATTO I found that the RAID 1 is producing different results compared to a single drive connected to the ICH9R: ATTO v2.34 (0.5-1024KB Total Length 32MB, Max Values): Non RAID: Write: 83506 Read: 87257 RAID 1: Write: 95189 Read: 118987
  4. Hello This is my first RAID 1 build and I have done my homework and read lots of info before posting. I wanted to write enough organized background information on this post together with my questions. As it came a little long I have marked my 2 questions in red. I like to thank you all in advance for trying to help me. I have built my last machine using Windows XP Pro with the following storage setup: On the ICH9R controller: SATA1: Raptor 74GB -> OS - No RAID SATA3: Seagate 1TB -> No RAID SATA4: Seagate 1TB -> RAID 1 (diskA) SATA5: Seagate 1TB -> RAID 1 (diskB) SATA6: Seagate 1TB -> No RAID On the jMicron eSATA ports: eSATA1: WD 1TB -> No RAID When I setup Windows I used IDE mode on the ICH9R. Everything was working smoothly. OS recognized and full formatted all the disk. I got of course BSOD after changing to RAID mode on the BIOS, but luckily this board has those jMicron eSATA ports. I connected the Raptor with the OS on one of these and could install the Matrix Storage Manager downloaded from Intel. After putting the Raptor back on the ICH9R port XP booted without any problems. I then created the RAID 1 from scratch from inside Windows and all was good. Here is where the things started to go bad: 1. I got an error every time I tried to full format the RAID 1 from XP's Disk Manager. After some minutes into the formatting process I just got a warning from the Matrix Storage Console that BOTH my RAID 1 drives have failed! I got the same message when booting. I tried rebuilding the RAID set and recreating it but nothing helped, I always got the fail in the middle of the full format. I then decided to use a quick format instead and things appeared to be ok. I loaded the RAID set with 650GB of info for testing and it appears to be working fine. I was left very uneasy about this fail. I am going to store important info on this RAID and a future fail could be very annoying. QUESTION: Do you know the reason for that the RAID 1 set cannot be full formatted? Should I be worried? Any comments/ideas are welcome. 2. After checking the options on the Intel Matrix Storage Manager I found that "Hard Drive's Write Cache" is enabled for the "array_000" but found an option to enable the "Volume's Write-Back Cache". This was confusing. The help states that the last one is just for RAID 5 sets. I went and check the properties of the RAID volume under Disk Manager and found under Policies that "Enable write caching on the disk" was not enabled. The 2 options for "Write caching and safe removal" were grayed out but I can see that "Optimize for performance" is selected. I tried to enable the write cache but I got this entry on the Event Viewer: EVENT ID: 34 The driver disabled the write cache on device \Device\Harddisk1\DR1. After this, the option "Enable write caching on the disk" that I had just marked on Disk Manager became grayed out. The same thing happened for every disk connected to the ICH9R after I tried to enable the Write Cache from Disk manager on them. BENCHMARKS RAID 1: SANDRA physical: Drive index of 73MB/s HD Tach Average Read: 87.9 MB/s. ATTO (0.5-1024KB Total Length 32MB, Max Values): Write: 83506 Read: 87257 These values are almost identical to the results of the Non RAID (same type Seagate 1TB) disk connected on the SATA3 port of the ICH9R. The SANDRA scores are also identical to the same disk on SATA3 when moved to a jMicron eSATA port. The only result that was different was HD Tach's "Burst Speed": Non RAID: 231.9 MB/s RAID 1: 139.5 MB/s QUESTION: Is this the normal behavior of the disks connected to the ICH9R? I don't understand why the Burst Speed of the RAID 1 volume is so low compared with a single disk connected to the same controller. 3. 2 of my Seagate disks have no fan installed in front of them. One of them is on 53C. The ones with fan installed (on the bottom of the case) are reporting ~35C. QUESTION: Is 53C a dangerous temperature for these disks? I appreciate your answers and opinions. Thanks a lot.
  5. Thorz

    AHCI and RAID 1 on ICH9R

    I was looking for the same info. Thanks a lot!
  6. I have a new Maxtor Diamondmax 10 300GB SATA. As the drive is much lowder than my WD120GB PATA one I was thinking that it could be something wrong. I wan Powermax and the drive passed the test without problems. It is formated with NTFS 2 partitions. I ran Spinrite on it and it passed without a single bad sector but I got the following that has me worried: SMART SYSTEM MONITOR: ______________ Error count___Minimun___Error Rate___Maximun ECC Corrected:__ 4,089,105_____4,714______6,497_______8,459 After letting it finish the other 50% howed: ECC Corrected:__3,673,183_____3,922______7,380_______16,702 The other values were: Rd chain margin: 0 |||||||||||||||| Corrent/Max: 153/153 Relocated sec: 0 ||||||||||||| 190/190 Recal retries: 0 |||||||||||| 30/30 RAW DATA: ||||||12E2 These ECC counters were climbing steady while the drive was been checked, continuosly. When I ran Spinrite in my other 2 drives (from the laptops) it reported 0 ECC errors, all the counters were in 0 and these drives have been used for some months already (6 months). Questions: 1. The Maxtor is a NEW drive, doesn't it suppose to be free of SMART ECC errors? 2. Do I have to worry about this? Is this drive flawed? It comes clean from Powermax tests but these ECC reports are driving me nuts. All my important info is on this drive. Your advice is greatly apreciated, I am seriously thinking on returning this drive if this is a problem spoted by SR6. I will explain to the store that my SMART capable application is warning me about the drive. As I am pretty new about SpinRite and to SMART I don't know how to interpretate these counters, but for me a new drive SHOULD NEVER have any errors. This is the SMART log from Passmark Drivecheckup: Drive 0 SMART enabled IDE REGISTERS: Features: 0x0 Sector Count: 0x1 Sector Number: 0x1 Cylinder Low: 0x0 Cylinder High: 0x0 Drive Head: 0xA0 Command: 0xEC DRIVE INFORMATION: Serial Number: B603SZ2H FirmWare Rev: BANC1980 Model Number: Maxtor 6B300S0 Cylinders: 16383 Heads: 16 Sectors per track: 63 Cur Cyls: 16383 Cur Heads: 16 Cur Sectors/Track: 63 Bytes per track: NA Bytes per sector: NA Gen Config: 64 Buffer Type: 3 Buffer Size: 32768 Vendor Unique: 0 0 0 More Vendor Unique: 0x8010 ECC Size: 4 Double Word IO: 0 Capabilities: 12032 PIO Timing: 512 DMA Timing: 0 BS: 7 Current Sector Capacity: 16514064 Total Addressable Sectors: 268435455 Mult. Sector Stuff: 272 Single Word DMA: 0 Multi Word DMA: 7 SMART ATTRIBUTES: ID Description Raw Value Status Value Worst Threshold -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Spin Up Time 9096ms OK 184 184 63 4 Start/Stop Count 32 OK 253 253 0 5 Reallocated Sector Count 0 OK 253 253 63 6 Read Channel Margin 0 OK 253 253 100 7 Seek Error Rate 0 OK 253 252 0 8 Seek Time Performance 47510 OK 246 246 187 9 Power On Time 23354 OK 252 252 0 A Spin Retry Count 0 OK 253 252 157 B Calibration Retry Count 0 OK 253 252 223 C Power Cycle Count 75 OK 253 253 0 C0 Power off Retract Count 0 OK 253 253 0 C1 Load/Unload Cycle Count 0 OK 253 253 0 C2 Temperature 34 C OK 50 253 0 C3 (Unknown attribute) 2903 OK 253 252 0 C4 Reallocation Event Count 0 OK 253 253 0 C5 Current Pending Sector Count 0 OK 253 253 0 C6 Offline Scan Incorrect. Sector Count 0 OK 253 253 0 C7 Ultra ATA CRC Error Count 0 OK 199 199 0 C8 Write Error Count 0 OK 253 252 0 C9 Off Track Errors 0 OK 253 252 0 CA Direct Address Mark Error Rate 0 OK 253 252 0 CB Error Correction Code Errors 0 OK 253 252 180 CC Raw Read Error Rate 0 OK 253 252 0 CD Thermal Asperity Rate 0 OK 253 252 0 CF Spin High Current 0 OK 253 252 0 D0 Spin Buzz 0 OK 253 252 0 D1 Off Line Seek Performance 153 OK 241 241 0 D2 (Unknown attribute) 0 OK 253 252 0 D3 (Unknown attribute) 0 OK 253 252 0 D4 (Unknown attribute) 0 OK 253 253 0 Thanks a lot for your help.
  7. Thorz

    What H/d To Choose For Os

  8. Thorz

    What H/d To Choose For Os

    These are the models of th 2 drives, I wonder where is the EDIT button in this forum? - Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 200GB S-ATA 8MB cache 7200RPM: ST3200822AS - Western Digital Caviar 200GB S-ATA 8MB cache 7200RPM: WD2000JD
  9. Thorz

    What H/d To Choose For Os

    Hello, this is my 1st post, great forum! This is a very nice thread, I have got plenty of onfo that I was looking for. I still have one question. I have XP Pro, P3 3Ghs, 1GB RAM and do the normal stuff (lots of internet surfing, bittorrent, large file copy/move, 3D games and sometimes I use Pinnacle Studio 9 for MiniDV edition, but not so much. I have the same drive as the thread starter, a WD Special Edition 120GB but I will sell it soon and will get the small Raptor (36GB) for my OS and programs and Windows pagefile. The other drive is the one that is giving me trouble to decide: What is better: - Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 200GB S-ATA 8MB cache 7200RPM or - Western Digital Caviar 200GB S-ATA 8MB cache 7200RPM Both cost exactly the same here. I was wondering if the Barracuda was maybe more silent than the WD, but in any other aspect I am lost. I apreciate your help m8s. Thank You.