HD Tune 2.10

[Da_Banig]

Is HD tune accurate? I downloaded the program for temp monitor, and I tested the speed, and wow. Found out some lame shit, my Raptor's average speed is like 55mb/s and I got a second hd which is a WD250GB 16MB cache SATA II HD and I got around 60mb/s which is faster tha my raptor HD. Could this be because my Raptor is my OS drive? and no I don't have any programs running in my background. Also for the temp, my Raptor always run below 30C and my 250GB runs above 45C+.

 

[MadModMike]

Is HD tune accurate? I downloaded the program for temp monitor, and I tested the speed, and wow. Found out some lame ****, my Raptor's average speed is like 55mb/s and I got a second hd which is a WD250GB 16MB cache SATA II HD and I got around 60mb/s which is faster tha my raptor HD. Could this be because my Raptor is my OS drive? and no I don't have any programs running in my background. Also for the temp, my Raptor always run below 30C and my 250GB runs above 45C+.

36GB Raptors use 1 36GB Platter, and therefore are ALOT slower (about 20MB/s) slower than the 74GB, which gets about 70MB/s, so you getting 55MB/s is about right for the 36GB Raptor.

~~Mad Mod Mike, fixin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[Da_Banig]

Is HD tune accurate? I downloaded the program for temp monitor, and I tested the speed, and wow. Found out some lame ****, my Raptor's average speed is like 55mb/s and I got a second hd which is a WD250GB 16MB cache SATA II HD and I got around 60mb/s which is faster tha my raptor HD. Could this be because my Raptor is my OS drive? and no I don't have any programs running in my background. Also for the temp, my Raptor always run below 30C and my 250GB runs above 45C+.

36GB Raptors use 1 36GB Platter, and therefore are ALOT slower (about 20MB/s) slower than the 74GB, which gets about 70MB/s, so you getting 55MB/s is about right for the 36GB Raptor.

~~Mad Mod Mike, fixin' the world 1 rig at a time


Thanks for the reply Mike, but I though using less platter makes the HD faster? Let's take an 80Gig HD for example, one uses 1 platter and the other one uses 2 platters, isn't the 1 faster than the two? um.... Got a link I can read bout it?

 

[MadModMike]

Is HD tune accurate? I downloaded the program for temp monitor, and I tested the speed, and wow. Found out some lame ****, my Raptor's average speed is like 55mb/s and I got a second hd which is a WD250GB 16MB cache SATA II HD and I got around 60mb/s which is faster tha my raptor HD. Could this be because my Raptor is my OS drive? and no I don't have any programs running in my background. Also for the temp, my Raptor always run below 30C and my 250GB runs above 45C+.

36GB Raptors use 1 36GB Platter, and therefore are ALOT slower (about 20MB/s) slower than the 74GB, which gets about 70MB/s, so you getting 55MB/s is about right for the 36GB Raptor.

~~Mad Mod Mike, fixin' the world 1 rig at a time


Thanks for the reply Mike, but I though using less platter makes the HD faster? Let's take an 80Gig HD for example, one uses 1 platter and the other one uses 2 platters, isn't the 1 faster than the two? um.... Got a link I can read bout it?

The 2 platters are striped (IIRC), thus resulting in faster performance than the single-platter Raptor. You could check Wikipedia under "Hard Drive" for more information.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

 

[Codesmith]

Each Platter has two read/write heads, so more platters mean better transfer rates. Same with an increase in data density.

Single platter drives are always the slowest in a hard drive family.

Occasionally adding that last platter is a bit of an engineering challenge and to get everything working they end up compromizing on performance.

Occasionally they compromise performance in order to push the capacity to new limits.

But 90% of the time larger means faster.