Sign in to follow this  
policyvote

(potenially) The Last Newbie posts a Maxtor D740X question

Recommended Posts

Hi, folks. I'm terribly saddened that I walked into this place just as the ship began to do down . . . it seems like a wonderful place.

That having been said, I just (JUST) purchased a new hard drive--the Maxtor D740X and accompanying Promise Ultra133 TX2. My objective was to get the fastest read speeds and burst speeds without breaking the bank on U160 SCSI (just broke the bank on A7M266-D and accompanying CPUs, DDR memory, PSU, HSFs, etc.). Did I make the right choice, or have I erred? Please, let me know!

Peace

policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You made a good choice.

From the latest I've heard, the Maxtor is a close second (or third) to

the fast WD 100G and 120G drives without 8MB caches, the ones

with cache pull out ahead, but not enough to sway hard core SCSI

users (except perhaps as additional storage).

The Maxtor was faster on access times, but the recently announced

IBM 120GXP seems to be ahead on that score.

All in all, I'd say I'm happy enough with my D740X that I haven't bothered tweaking the acoustic management for better performance

yet. Maybe in a couple of months when the new drive smell wears

off.

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cquinn--cool. Thanks for the encouraging word. I did look at the WD drives, but my own poor experiences with WD in the past (and the comparative scores in SR's database) pointed towards the Maxtor as the way to go. I would love to see the 120 GXP review by SR before everything goes down the drain, but I'm sure that's wishful thinking--and besides, as I said, the money is out the door and the drive + controller is on its way. Oh, well. I'm sure this drive will smoke my old DiamondMax either way.

Peace

policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I hate to be bothersome, but I have another question, and I didn't feel it merited a whole new thread (nobody likes the new guy walking in and asking a billion basic questions . . .).

Recently, I've been informed that RAID 0 (especially IDE RAID 0) actually slows read speeds, even while it boosts write speeds tremendously. Is this correct? MaximumPC's tests seem to idicate that to be the truth--but did they screw up? I built an IDE RAID 0 box last year (2x 75GXP) and was very, very disappointed to find myself the last guy in the QIII arena on a consistent basis, and thought that Win2K was, if anything, faster on my lesser box (equipped with a single DiamondMax Plus 40, IIRC). So, the limited anecdotal evidence I have seems to back this theory up . . .

Peace

policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest russofris
Recently, I've been informed that RAID 0 (especially IDE RAID 0) actually slows read speeds, even while it boosts write speeds tremendously.  Is this correct

Hi there,

IDE RAID 0 is a very touchy subject here. Some love it, some hate it. That said, I will try my best to remain objective about the whole thing.

Increasing preformance through IDE RAID 0 is not an easy thing to do. There are two dozen drives on the market with a dozen or so controller types. There are a half dozen firmware revs each for the drives and controllers. The problem is that only certain configurations have proven themselves to work optimally.

You will find that there is no clear choice currently for a compatible and stable setup. 75GXP's work wonderfully with Promise FT100's with most firmware revs, but tend to self destruct. HPT's work with Maxtors except on Via chipsets. Some drives work well in soft RAID on Intel chipsets but not on others unless your 4 in 1 drivers are a certain rev with a certain cluster size. The list goes on and on.

All in all, we will probably have to wait for the next generation of IDE devices before we see "totally" effective RAID products. This may not even occur till we have serial ATA. I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's a pain in the ass.

The best advice that I can give is to find someone who has a RAID setup that is working to your liking and mimick his storage subsystem configuration. Same controller, same drives, same firmware, same MB, same bios, same IDE drivers, same cluster size, same FS. Only then do you have a 99% chance of it working out to your satisfaction. (unless you are willing to blow $100's on trial and error)

As a last note, I will beat a lot of people to the punch.... Dud3, for the amount that you are going to spend on another IDE drive, you could have gotten a ABCD 15K 8MB buffered 18GBXP geosynchronous SCSI setup with a 128MB wltra 320 dual channel PCI HW RAID 66x64 card. It would lower your TCO and only cost you $1000 more and never have to upgrade!! (just kidding)

Thank you for your time,

Frank Russo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend you forget about IDE RAID. It's not worth the time or the money. I tried it with a KT7A-R and I got out of the the deal was alot of data that went to the bit bucket. :twisted: I was persistent at trying to get it to be reliable, but in the end I bought a Tekram SCSI controller and it solved my need for speed. As far as speed goes my two POS 75GXPs :evil: in RAID 0 couldn't hold a candle to my Atlas 10KIII. I have a D740X also, it's fast and so far has been reliable, stick with the D740X unless you want to go with SCSI. As far as the "feel" of the system, two IDEs in RAID 0 seem to have a read advantage for large files but when it comes to seeking for different files a single IDE seems to have the advantage, QuakeIII???.

Digi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, thanks for the replies, guys. Digi, my one RAID array was also 2x 75GXP in a KT7A-R. As I said, I wasn't satisfied, either. The box now rests in the hands of a friend who wanted big-time GB for his .mp3 collection.

russofris--You make some excellent points. But as far as finding a cool RAID array and duping it . . . well, frankly, I'm by far the most knowledgable computer tech amongst my real-life friends ("AT is where the video is on the otherboard and ATX means it has an AGP slot instead!" :roll: "), and it's pretty hard to quantify such subjective things as "How responsive does it feel?" over the Internet. I think I'm gonna try this single-drive action. I might try getting another drive and card and go for soft RAID--but honestly, I don't trust soft RAID, and I've always been a big believer in doing it in hardware rather than tax the CPU, anyway. Ultimately, if this drive doesn't satisfy my need for speed, then . . .

d00d, I'll go 4 SCSI!!!!1 O'course, just the U160 SCSI controller will cost more than the Maxtor + Promise card . . . but hey, that's the cost of performance, I suppose. Still, given the rest of the rig, I shouldn't be lacking in the speed department. Thanks again--and if anyone else wants to wiegh in, please do so!

Peace

policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this