pico1180

Patron
  • Content Count

    769
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by pico1180

  1. Please don't judge... and its better just to nod and say, oooohkay. But what was the fastest Hard Drive in 1999? It could have come out as late as the end of '99, but if it released in Jan 1 of '00, it is off the table. I made it to the legacy hard drive benchmark comparison, but it wasn't able to show many any results. I have the Seagate Cheetah 18LP, the Fujitsu MAG3182LP, and the Atlas 10k. I don't think those products were refreshed until the first quarter of '00. I don't know what a user would have chosen for an in home experience back then if money wasn't an option. For some reason I don't remember much about the Cheetah 18LP. I want to say, most of the attention for in home use during that time was focused on the Fujitsu MAG, and the Atlas 10k. I also don't know what was hot in the IDE space at the time.
  2. pico1180

    What was the best in 1999?

    Good info! Much appreciated! I completely forgot about the 34GXP! I will start poking around to see if I can find one. I do conclude the Atlas 10k was the best you could get. Can anyone place the production date for the Seagate 36LP? SR looks like they reviewed one in Feb of 00, but when did production start? Seagate publications would indicate late 99. Can anyone confirm this?
  3. pico1180

    What was the best in 1999?

    I was able to find some of the archived reviews from back then. But I cant access any of the benchmark results.
  4. I get the bit v. byte conversation and the age old, “OMG! My 1TB drive formatted down to 913GB usable!” complaint. However, this particular issue in this instance is stumping me. I’m here to offer a different spin on the, “where did all my capacity go?” complaint. At the “500GB point” I see a lot of manufactures advertising different sizes. Are these drives actually different sizes, or are these companies just reporting their drives differently and the usable capacity is the same? Is a 512GB SSD going to provide me 32GB’s more of usable space then the 480GB? Or is it just a different way to market the same capacity?
  5. Ok. Good to know. I wanted to make sure they werent all goign to format down to the same capactiy. If I want the most usable at that storage point, I will focus on 512GB SSD's. Thank you.
  6. Hello, I have searched the internet for this. By and far, the most popular answer I seem to see is, buy a Seagate Hybrid. I do find that to be an amicable solution in some cases. However, it is not what I am looking for in this case. I am under the impressing a current gen VRaptor saddled with a 64GB SSD cache would outperform a Seagate Hybrid drive. Benchmarks to the contrary would sway my opinion, but I am currently under the belief the above mentioned setup would be faster then a Hybrid. With that being said, other than Intel’s caching (I think they call it Smart Response), are there any solutions out there? I would like to run a dedicated SSD boot drive, a large capacity SSD storage drive, then a larger capacity mechanical drive with an SSD cache. My current setup is C: = SSD, D: = 3x512 SSDs <- currently out of room. I would like to go to a setup that looks like this: C: = SSD, D: = 2x512 SSD. E: = 1TB w/ SSD cache. Advice on caching software, or evidence that would support, caching isn’t any better than Seagate’s Hybrid drives is where I would like to focus. Thank you.
  7. pico1180

    SSD Caching Software. Any suggestions?

    So, I think I have made my decision. I will add a 500-1TB platter drive until 1TB SSD's come down. I expect to move too a 2x1TB setup around this time next year. I have my eyes on a 1TB WD Black WD100SFZEX and a VRaptor WD5000HHTZ. Both are the same price. Capacity is not a concern. All I need is 500GB. The most intense task it will do is gamming. Witch should I get?
  8. pico1180

    SSD Caching Software. Any suggestions?

    I noticed the VRaptor wasn't on the leaderboard. Is that old hat?
  9. pico1180

    SSD Caching Software. Any suggestions?

    I have used the Seagate Hybrids to great effect in the past. I just think I want something a little more robust for this situation. Specifically, faster platters. But that is a good point. If the Seagate Hybrids are just as good as a VRaptor+64GB then that is that. So, I have maxed out a 3x512 RAID 0 SSD area. There are arguable many things on that raid that don’t need to be on an SSD. There is about 100 gigs right off the top I can take off, and if I sacrificed I could probably free up a bunch more. But I don’t think I could go down past 1TB of pure SSD goodness. The array has 98% applications/programs/games installed on it. I would like to move less used applications/programs/games off the SSD area to a fast mechanical alternative. If I could move enough off it, and I'm not saying I can, but if I could, I would like to down-size it to 2x512. It may be that I won’t be able to move THAT much data off the 3x512 to be able to remove an entire 512GB disk from the array. That is a possibility. Ideally if money was no option I would run 2x1TB SSD's and that would be that. But I can’t bring myself to put down that kind of money. Alternatively, I could add another 512. That is a completely valid option. But I’m already nervous about 3x512s. The more I think about this the more I think the Hybrid Seagate is my answer. I just wanted something more robust then that.
  10. So, I have a windows home server running cat5e everywhere in my house. All the runs are full gigabyte but one. It keeps dropping to 100BASE-TX (12MB/s). Process of elimination has indicated the problem is in the CAT5e drop somewhere. Either on the keystone jacks, or somewhere in the wire itself. I was wondering if anyone has experience with this. I was hoping someone could tell me exactly what wire(s) I'm having trouble with (loose, not making contact, etc.). If I can’t get it isolated, I'm going to have to rip the whole drop out of the wall and replace it. I don’t want to do that. At all. I'm confused as to how it can cary a 100BASE-TX signal, but not a 1000BASE-T. It has carried a 1000BASE-T signal in that past, but its intermittent. Now it won’t do it all. To someone who knows this kind of stuff, it may be very clear and apparent. I just simply don’t know enough about it to understand why it will carry a 100BASE-TX, but not a 1000BASE-T. Any suggestions would help. Thank you.
  11. OK, so I was happily running a Windows 7 MCPC (HTPC) when I decided to upgrade to Windows 8. Long story short is, Windows 8 took my 4 drive spanned volume, broke it, and reinitialized it as 4 independent hard drives. When Win 8 reinitialized the drives it did it old-school like. It made a 2TB portion and pushed the rest out into unallocated space. Think LBA instead of GPT. That is kind of the bad part, but not really. The REAL bad part is, I don't understand how to initialize the drives to their full capacity. Under Disk Manager I cant, well, manage the disks. All the options are grayed out no mater what I right click on. The only options are Properties and Help. I cant change drive letters, I cant Delete, Shrink, or anything. I know I wont be able to recover my deleted Spanned volume, but I was hopping I could at least "unlock" the drives. Anyone have any suggestions?
  12. So I think I know what the answer is. All my data is lost, right? This is under Windows 7, Dynamic Disc, Spanned Array. This is not a striped array, but I hardly see the difference. Obviously the drive that has failed is lost, but what about the others? I don’t mind loosing the data. It was a backup of a backup so It’s no big deal, but we are talking about 8TB of data here total. It’s going to take the better part of two days to copy that much data back. I would love to be able to salvage the data on the other two drives. If it’s any consolation, the array isn’t broken. At least yet. just one of the drives has failed in it. I can’t write to the array anymore and when I try to use scandisk on it, it can’t complete it. So that puts me in the middle ground of failing but not failed yet. I would love to just boot the bad drive out, loose whatever data is on it and insert a new drive into the spanned array. Is that even possible?
  13. pico1180

    Games of 2012

    By far, Mass Effect 3 and Diablo III Star Craft II: Heart of the Swarm I will keep my eye open for anything Skyrim related too.
  14. Not because I’m a speed freak or anything, but because it’s cheaper. Depending on the drive, it can be anywhere from $10 to $50 cheaper to buy two 120’s and RAID them then to buy their 240 equivalent. However, the age old debate continues; does RAID 0 really increase performance beyond sequential? I may be more inclined to buy a single 240GB at a marginally higher price for the simplicity then 120GBx2. That is if real world performance isn’t improved by much. And by real world, I mean the HTPC, Gaming and Productivity bench’s. You don’t have to do a full battery of disks. Or even a full battery of tests. Just slap two 120’s in RAID 0, toss your real world bench’s at it and post the results. OKGO!
  15. I know there is a little more activity on this in the 240GB review of this drive, but, in the intrest of staying on topic, I wanted to post here. I’m extremely interested in purchasing a few of these 120GB versions, but the numbers worry me. Especially, the hit it takes on non-compressible data. I understand all SSD’s take a hit there but going from 456MB/s to 162MB/s is pretty unacceptable. Did firmware fix this? The thread on the 240GB version eluded to it, but is there anything solid?
  16. pico1180

    SSD RAID 0 Benchmarks Please

    Thank you very much. I appreciate that. For whatever reason I missed that review. I searched the site for “SSD RAID” but that didn’t come up. Again. Thank you. And that does answer my question. Not only is getting to 240GB’s cheaper by going RAID0, but judging by those results, its faster in nearly everything. I wasn’t excepting random 4k’s to see an increase. I also wasn’t expecting to see such a huge performance increase in the “real world” bench’s.
  17. pico1180

    Best upcoming games in 2011?

    We should update this for upcoming games of 2012. The only thing I was really lookig forward to this year was Skyrim and Modern Warfare 3. Well, Dragon Age 2, but that was first part of the year. MW3 was good. I knew what to expect so I wasn’t disappointed. Full price for an expansion is BS, but it is what it is. Skyrim is freaking amazing. I love it. 60+ hours on it and I dont think I'm halfway through. And I'm no slacker either! I consider myself a power player. I will have spent 8 to 10 hours a day on that game a few times. It has its issues, but the depth of the game is like nothing I have ever experienced before. That includes the Fallout universe. I can answer specifics if anyone wants. For 2012? Mass Effet 3 Diablo III Starcraft II: Heat of the Swarm
  18. pico1180

    WD20EARS For Sale

    Hello everyone. I am posting some extra WD 20EARS on eBay. I'm starting them at $10 and letting the market decide what they're worth. I will ship internationally, but it is EXPENSIVE! I use USPS Priority Mail International and I charge the buyer actual cost. It usually comes out to be around $30 USD. All the drives are under factory warranty. I also take very good care packing them. I will ship together for a consolidated shipping cost. http://www.ebay.com/itm/160692965631?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649 http://www.ebay.com/itm/160692967524?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649 http://www.ebay.com/itm/160692972991?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649 http://www.ebay.com/itm/160692973862?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649
  19. So, I'm making a USB boot disk. Simple put, what is the fastest USB thumb drive out there? All I need is about 4GB. Or maybe should I consider flash memory of some sort? Class 6 SD chip maybe?
  20. I have a Phoenix Pro FM-25S2S-120GBP2 When I originally got it it was scoring pretty low on CrystalDiskMark (CDM). See screen shot. Come to find out that is actually where G. Skill says it should be. They have CDM scores posted on their product page. That is far from the 285MB/s read's, 275MB/s writes, and 50k IOPS they claim. How they can claim those numbers, yet post CDM scores that clearly reflect something else, I dont know. I understand the manufacturers claimed specs are usually not correct. But never have I see such a discrepancy between claimed and actual. But anyways, the drive was initially a huge disappointment, but I didnt realize it was actually performing where it should. Somewhere in-between formatting to different sector sizes in hopes of getting it to perform more closely to its specs it got worse. Now it looks like this. Unacceptable to say the least. I am running an AMD 790FX board in AHCI mode with the latest drivers. Other then sending it back, anyone have any advice?
  21. Well, after fighting with the HDDErase program for about 6 hours, I finally got it. Once I finally got the program to work, the actual secure erase only took about a second. Maybe less. I was expecting a long process. Now my CDM scores are back to where they were before the zero write fill. I have never seen a zero write fill do that before. I have used it to restore SSD performance before. This time it had the exact opposite affect... ATTO scores will come soon... EDIT: How would I have been able to get it back to "fresh" factory settings without doing a secure erase? I never want to have to go through that fight again...
  22. any suggestions other then HDDErase? preferably something that works within then windows environment.
  23. No, I did not. I have had personal, hands on experience with WD SiliconEdge 64, and 128GB, Kingston SSDNow SNV125 64GB, OCZ Agility 60GB, and the Intel X25-V 40GB. All of which showed benchmark results very near what the manufacture claimed. Within a margin so close I wouldnt even consider it a discrepancy. With the Pheniox Pro I'm about 80MB/s off from manufactures claim for reads and nearly 200MB/s off from writes. Not to mention I get HALF of the random 4k IOPS G. Skill claims I should get (26k opposed to 50k). Furthermore, I did a zero write fill on the drive. After that is when my writes went from triple digits to double digits.
  24. so the drastic drop off in write speed is normal?