ER

Member
  • Content Count

    348
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ER

  1. My DM+8 was totally silent (idle + seeks), whereas my DM+9 makes a faint low rumbling noise (pleasant to the ear) when it seeks, but it too is silent at idle. Your drive must be mounted somehow that it resonates or then it's just plain RMA'able.
  2. ER

    22 Inch CRT recommendations

    I believe the Sony GDM-F520R is the elite CRT-display with best image quality and smallest dot pitch (.22mm), although namely it is a 21-inch display. However, basically a 21-inch monitor gives you a usable view area the same size as a 21-inch display. The sharpest picture from a CRT monitor (including the Sony) I have seen until know comes from my Nokia 21" 445pro Flat Trinitron (FD Trinitron), which is excellent even at 1600x1280. However at this resolution I have only 85Hz, and since I have sensitive eyes, I mostly use 1280x1024 at 100Hz, which is razor sharp. The Sony gives you 100Hz at 1600x1280. The FD trinitron displays have the best image, if you don't mind the two very faint wires which can be seen on light backgrounds. Alternately, if money is not a problem I personally have been looking at 20-inch LCD displays, which give an even sharper image quality and the same viewable area as 21- or 22-inch CRTs. There are some drawbacks, since the largest LCD's don't have the new short response times and great view angles & brightness as the smaller (15 & 17-inch) ones have now developed. By the way- stay away from the CPD-series, this is their entry- and medium-grade display range. The professional displays are GDM-series. From Sony's home page (also suggested retail price): PREMIERPRO Series 21 FD Trinitron® CRT GDM-F520 The F520 is ideal for the demanding CAD and graphic professionals. The virtually flat, high resolution FD Trinitron® CRT combined with a 0.22mm aperture grille pitch sets a new level of performance with superior image clarity and brighter colors making it perfect for detailed 3D renderings and graphic design work. Free Shipping on Displays $ 1,699.99 as low as $43.00/ mo
  3. ER

    22 Inch CRT recommendations

    I believe the Sony GDM-F520R is the elite CRT-display with best image quality and smallest dot pitch (.22mm), although namely it is a 21-inch display. However, basically a 21-inch monitor gives you a usable view area the same size as a 21-inch display. The sharpest picture from a CRT monitor (including the Sony) I have seen until know comes from my Nokia 21" 445pro Flat Trinitron (FD Trinitron), which is excellent even at 1600x1280. However at this resolution I have only 85Hz, and since I have sensitive eyes, I mostly use 1280x1024 at 100Hz, which is razor sharp. The Sony gives you 100Hz at 1600x1280. The FD trinitron displays have the best image, if you don't mind the two very faint wires which can be seen on light backgrounds. Alternately, if money is not a problem I personally have been looking at 20-inch LCD displays, which give an even sharper image quality and the same viewable area as 21- or 22-inch CRTs. There are some drawbacks, since the largest LCD's don't have the new short response times and great view angles & brightness as the smaller (15 & 17-inch) ones have now developed.
  4. Eugene, Is the drive the same specimen which you used in the benchmarking (results of which are in the database)? I agree with you that the DM+8 is certainly not as fast as the DM+9 (8MB cache) or the WD 800JB (I own both drives), but in daily non-heavy work I wouldn't say that the difference was as radical as the database results would seem to indicate. For performance users, who demand good IO performance the DM+8 is not the best choice, but for 70% of the public I'd say it IS a fast drive.
  5. See my thread titled "Diamondmax +8 faster than DM+9?". In my experience, the DM+8 is a fast drive and as ZStation says, in real-world use it is on par with the DM+9 or other fast 7200RPM drives, certainly nowhere near 5400RPM or slower like SR's test results seem to indicate. Actually my measurements with the 40GB DM+8's and my new 80GB DM+9's (w 8MB cache) indicate, that their seek times are very similar. However, the DM+8 is a 80GB/platter drive and the DM+9 seems to be only a 60 or 66GB/platter drive, so if both were 80GB/platter drives the DM+9 would probably seem faster than now. Of course platter density itself does not make a drive faster in real-world.
  6. ER

    16 lawyers need my (your) help

    Since I've worked as a lawyer and information specialist in a 50-lawyer firm, I have some first-hand experience how things are done in such a conservative environment. I'm not sure if your respective firm uses any document management software like PCDOCS or OPENDOCS etc. but if not and documents are just stored as Word-files on hard drives, I suggest that a X: -drive is created and under there you make folders based on client names or cases (case name or number). A law firm has to have some kind of system in their cases (probably case numbers), so corresponding folders could be made to this X-drive. This X-drive is a standard server drive, which itself is for example RAIDed or something for maximum hard disk safety and security, if a disk fails. Then our firm used DLT-backups each night to make off-site backups for extra safety, of course there have to be many verions, do not use the same tape each time- a one or two week cycle (7-14 tapes) at least. With this easy system you get safety for on-line data (RAID) and have also 1-day old off-line backups if everything goes wrong. You just have to get people to save to this X-drive and its subfolders. Maybe an additional Y-drive with similar backups can be made, which hold folders named after each lawyer, i.e. JohnSmith, JaneDoe etc.
  7. ER

    wd800jb has idle noise?

    To put it short: NO. The 800JB is totally silent in idle and seeks. If your WD makes noises, it is faulty so RMA it. Please use the search tool - there are dozens of threads discussing exactly this same question.
  8. ER

    IBM/HITACHI 180GXP 8mb question

    Sorry, but at least the WD 800JB is totally silent in idle and in seeks. Your drive sounds RMA-able.
  9. ER

    High Speed CDRW media

    My Traxdata 80-minute AND 10X high-speed CD-RW disks are of very good quality. I've used some disks over 100 times and all my disks at least 1-10 times and there have been no errors or problems. I can heartily recommend these disks.
  10. My 800JB is more quiet than my 80GB 120GXP, my 80GB Maxtor Diamondmax +9 8MB cache or my previous 30GB IBM 75GXP. The 800JB is as quiet as was my 40GB Diamondmax +8 - in other words totally silent in idle and seeks! RMA your drive, that loudness is not normal. I propose the same to everyone who says that their 800JB is loud or makes any noise.
  11. ER

    Been to HELL and lived to TELL

    I had a similar experience with my 2nd machine's Abit BM6 recently. It had two PC133 128MB sticks. All of a sudden, after working fine for a few years, the computer develops registry corruption and other files and data etc. start to corrupt generally. I used three days troubleshooting, reinstalling windows etc. I suspected it was the hard disk or memory, but wasn't sure until luckily someone here pointed me to similar memory problems he had with an Abit motherboard. Seems that Abit killed my memory sticks. When I bought new RAM, suddenly everything was fine again. So much for Abit quality in my eyes (back then when I bought the motherboard it was one of the most expensive and "quality" ones, especially an overclocker's choice- now I'm not sure that Abit and quality can be used in the same sentence without the word "bad" somewhere).
  12. ER

    Maxtor DM +9 Users

    No problems with my 80GB Maxtor Diamondmax + 9 8MB cache. Can't say the same thing about the 75GXP which this drive (2 failed) replaced...
  13. ER

    Need advice on DVD drive

    I've been very satisfied with my Lite-on 16X DVD-ROM, which complements my Sony DRU-500A DVD-burner.
  14. The findings of Eugene really surprised me. I have to say that I'm not totally convinced that the results are accurate. During my short usage of the DM +8 with Adobe Photoshop, Pagemaker, Office XP, DV edit, DVD burning and multiplexing etc. I have to say the drive was definitely on par with my 80GB DM+9 8MB cache that since replaced the DM+8. My other drives are WD 800JB /w 8MB cache, IBM 120GXP 80GB and IBM 75GXP 30GB. In my (quite disk-intensive) usage, which includes also gaming with Max Payne, F1GP4, Flight Simulator 2002 and Ghost recon (quite heavy loading) I would rank the disks in following order in responsiveness: 1. WD 800JB 2. DM+8 / DM+9 4. 120GXP 5. 75GXP Especially when I copied backup data from my 800JB to the Diamondmax +8 and Diamondmax +9 8MB cache, the DM+8 was faster- I clocked about a 10% difference in copy time when restoring the backup (pure file copy, about 4GB data, huge number of files). The disk access time (with AAM enabled in best performance mode) was similar with both drives, but actually the DM+8 had a faster access time with a measured 14.0ms timer (my DM+8 was 6E040L0)! If it were only pure STR (in which the DM+8 is noticeably faster), I believe it should have slower seeks times. I believe Eugene you have something wrong with AAM in your test. With my DM+9 I got clearly worse results with AAM disabled(!), so I would try retesting the drive with different AAM settings. I got over 15ms with AAM _DISabled_, about 1.5ms slower than with it enabled in best performance mode.
  15. The 200GB Special edition 7200RPM WD has the following specs: Rotational Speed 7,200 RPM (nominal) Buffer Size 8 MB Buffer To Disk 736.0 Mbits/s (Max) Read Seek Time (Average) 8.9 ms Write Seek Time (Average) 10.9 ms (average) Track-To-Track Seek Time 2.0 ms (average) Full Stroke Seek 21.0 ms (average) Average Latency 4.2 ms (nominal) This buffer to disk rate would make 92mb/s, which of course is not the reality, more like 60mb/s with the 80GB platter version. What's the rationale behind this figure? Can I extrapolate using the JB's figure of 92mb/s=60mb/s thus calculating that 102mb/s=66,52mb/s real-world transfer rate?
  16. Specs of the WD Raptor. Is the 102mb disk-to-buffer transfer rate real??? How much might the read speed/transfer rate be? The specs are quite impressive and the noise seems quite low. I think this will be an ideal drive for a boot/OS/main applications drive. I would move my 800JB for storage and games. http://www.wdc.com/products/WD360GD.asp --------------------------------- Physical Specifications Capacity 36.7 GB Areal Density 36.7 GB Model Number WD360GD Formatted Capacity 1 37,019 MB User Sectors Per Drive 72,303,840 (44F44E0h) Interface Max 1.5 Gb PHY serial Interface Bytes Per Sector 512 Dedicated Landing Zone Yes Actuator Latch/Auto Park Yes Performance Specifications Data Transfer Rate - Buffer to Host - Buffer to Disk 150 MB/s max 2 102 MB/s max Average Read Seek 5.2 ms (average) Track-to-track Seek 3 0.7 ms (average) Full Stroke Read Seek 3 10.2 ms (average) Average Latency 2.99 ms Rotational Speed 10,000 RPM Read Cache Adaptive Write Cache Yes Buffer 8 MB Drive Ready Time 7.0 sec average Start/Stop Cycles 20,000 min Error Rate (non-recoverable) < 1 in 1015 bits read Physical Dimensions Height 1.028 in. (25.4 mm) max Length 5.787 in. (147.0 mm) max Width 4.0 in. (101.6 mm) ± .01 in. Weight 1.60 lb. (0.73 kg) ± 10% Power Requirements 4 Mode 12 V (± 10%) 5 V (± 5%) Power Read / Write 430 mA 925 mA 9.75 W Idle 350 mA 5 850 mA 9.25 W Standby 25.5 mA 350 mA 2.1 W Sleep 25.75 mA 200 mA 1.3 W 3.3 V Serial ATA power not used in this product. Environmental Specifications 6 Shock Operating 20 G (write), 65 G (read) Non-operating 250 G Half sine wave measured in 2 ms duration, measured without isolation. Vibration Operating - Random 0.008 g2/Hz (10 to 300 Hz) 0.0012 g2/Hz (300 to 500 Hz) - Linear 10-300 Hz, 3.0G (0 to peak) 300-500 Hz, 0.5G (0 to peak) - Rotary 30 rad/s2 (10 to 500 Hz) Non-operating - Random 0.05 g2 /Hz (10 to 300 Hz) - Linear 10-300 Hz, 5.0G (0 to peak) Operating Temperature and Humidity Temperature 5°C to 55°C Humidity 5-95% RH non-condensing Thermal Gradient 20°C/hour (maximum) Non-Operating Temperature and Humidity Temperature -40°C to 65°C Humidity 5-95% RH non-condensing Thermal Gradient 30°C/hour Acoustics (average) Idle Mode 32 dBA average Seek Mode 36 dBA Reliability MTBF 7 1,200,000 hours Warranty 5 years
  17. ER

    10k vs 15k Please help!!!

    For going with SCSI I would suggest go for the best, if you can afford it, meaning the Seagate 15k.3. I don't think anything less would justify the extra cost of SCSI, you'd probably get similar performance of a 10kRPM SCSI drive with a [partitioned] WD 200GB 8MB cache 7200RPM IDE drive in _desktop_ use (probably for a lower or same cost)- more heavy "server-like" use and multitasking would show the merits of SCSI, and in this situation the Seagate would be even better. Anyway, 92mb/s and 40mb/s seems quite low for a 4 drive RAID0, it should in my opinion be more like 120mb/s- the limiting factor should be the PCI bus at 132mb/s (about 120mb/s in practice). By the way, I noticed you mentioned video editing. In large file manipulation bandwith (not so much fast seeks) is most important, and thus the cheapest/best performance solution is indeed RAID0- that means buying IDE drives with 80GB platters, which have a max read speed of around 60mb/s (vs 76mb/s for the Cheetah 15k.3). For a cheap max bandwith-RAID0 (otherwise though not a stellar performer according to Eugene) I'd suggest the Maxtor Diamondmax + 8, which is the cheapest 80GB platter drive.
  18. ER

    10k vs 15k Please help!!!

    For going with SCSI I would suggest go for the best, if you can afford it, meaning the Seagate 15k.3. I don't think anything less would justify the extra cost of SCSI, you'd probably get similar performance of a 10kRPM SCSI drive with a [partitioned] WD 200GB 8MB cache 7200RPM IDE drive in _desktop_ use (probably for a lower or same cost)- more heavy "server-like" use and multitasking would show the merits of SCSI, and in this situation the Seagate would be even better. Anyway, 92mb/s and 40mb/s seems quite low for a 4 drive RAID0, it should in my opinion be more like 120mb/s- the limiting factor should be the PCI bus at 132mb/s (about 120mb/s in practice).
  19. Really? I believe there are many members here who would object to that classification- that and your SCSI/IDE classifications are very coarse.
  20. Can you please elaborate what you mean by "stuttering"? Is the system non-responsive at intervals or do you mean some weird sound?
  21. This IS only the first round, but someone has to open the game! I'd guess sure we'll se other manufacturers announce their 10kRPM ATA drives to celebrate SATA, perhaps someone will even announce a parallel ATA 10kRPM drive. Most probably Seagate will be next.
  22. Well well, it was true after all!! Raptor- I like that name! Reasonable price, snappy performance and OK capacity. Not bad, although I would have hoped for a 72GB model, why limit to only 36GB?
  23. OK, then this is a SCSI issue. Do you have Tekram's latest SCSI drivers or do you use XP's original ones? Try both. I'd suggest you try another SCSI card, and preferably another manufacturer's, for example Adaptec.
  24. I just couldn't constrain myself anymore: I find this talk about "overpriced 10kRPM ATA" ridiculous. How the h*ll do you know it'll be overpriced??? Of course it will carry a price premium over 7200RPM IDE drives, but it will never be as expensive as SCSI 10kRPM drives, and SCSI requires an additional USD 150 controller card. WD isn't stupid enough to make a suicide move. On the contrary, since they don't have to worry about their SCSI sales, they can make the drive cheap enough to eat into other manufacturers' SCSI sales. The talk is similar crap that took place when 7200RPM IDE drives first came out- "who needs 7200RPM IDE?". Well plenty of people judging by the sales. Besides, someone has to be innovative for the technology to go forward. Sounds like some SCSI-freaks are getting scared we'll get better performance much cheaper with IDE than with their expensive SCSI-setups. We'll just have to wait and see. If the rumor is true, then it will have a point to continue this discussion.