• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Fant

  • Rank
  1. Fant

    IBM Deathstar 75gxp.

    Yeah I had no problem RMA'ing a fuked 75gxp. Just went to the website, downloaded their tool which installs on a floppy and checks the drive and places a code on the disk. Then you fill out an online form, stick in your floppy disk...presto instant RMA # assigned. Didnt even have to deal with an assinine human. What could be easier?
  2. I agree....cache should be used on writes by default. It should be bypassed for safety only on critical files or situations or when verify is turned on.
  3. justinm: are you using basic discs or dynamic discs in winxp?
  4. leoker i think we are saying the same thing....use the write through cache for perforrmance...
  5. Fant

    IBM Z15 Problem - Strange!!!

    I believe my oem IBM ultarstar does the same thing...who cares the damn this works just fine...and i honestly dont notice it much louder than my other ide drives...
  6. Interesting theory. And it seems to make sense. All we need now is a utility for WinXP to force writethrough cache on or force it off. Do you know if simply explorer file copies enable it or not? I would think to achieve fastest performance you want it enabled.
  7. Following up to what i wrote above. Hoever if you have two systems which both have 192-384mb of ram and where virtual memory will be used heavily when running games and apps then of course drive speed will make a big difference and the 15krpm u160 system will blow away the 7200rpm ide...
  8. Thats why I maintain that the largest bottleneck in most systems is not the slow drive speed....but the low amount of ram. People are running WinXP with 256mb of ram. Running any handful of applications and you will be swapping to virtual memory which slows everythign down. Run with 512mb ram or more and the system will be nice and speedy. Add more ram and the hard drive speed becomes less and less important for the average desktop user. I think if you had two systems both with say 768MB of ram and one had a semi fast 7200rpm ide drive while another had a seagate cheetah 15,000rpm u160 scsi drive that you would be hard pressed to tell much difference in most things.
  9. I'm runnin a 39160 with a IBM Ultrastar 15krpm and I get around 43MB/sec sustained with winxp and dynamic disk and atto...
  10. Chances are the faster photo loading time was due to the fact that they used up most of their physical memory where you still had some left. And photoshop stores all photos in memory fully uncompressed so it needs lots of memory. So while your friends were running on virtualy memory you were running on physical hence the improved loading time.
  11. heated snail: you sure you are right clicking onthe drive (extreme left) and not on the partition?
  12. Nope...when i installed winxp..i told it to make my entire 18gb drive a basic fat32 as one partition...then i upgraded it to a dynamic disk no problem...
  13. heated snail: There is NO problem converting a system drive to dynamic while its occupied. I just did it on my system. Just go to disk management and right click on the drive and say convert to dynamic. It will do it on next reboot. In fact I dont believe there is a way to make a dynamic disk until AFTER you install windows 2000/xp. It cannot be done during the installation process. But thanks to others i've succesfully backed up the dynamic disk with ghost 2003.
  14. heated snail: how much memory did you have compare to your friends with the 5400rpm hard drives?
  15. one other thing...even tho my system boots winxp like 5 sec faster with takes 10 more sec to detect my single scsi device at boot opposed to 1/10th sec to detect the ide devices...why is that?