- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (29) |
- Share
The following table lists all of the system components we use in our new storage reference system. In addition to the Supermicro motherboard and Intel Core i7 processor, we picked Corsair DDR3 memory and two rather old components: an ATI Radeon HD 3450 graphics card, and a Seagate NL35 400 GB hard drive. Neither is particularly fast, but they don’t have to be. The graphics card doesn’t matter at all for storage testing, and the hard drive is only important for system and benchmark startup. Since neither of these components affects benchmark performance on test drives, we could use essentially any component we wanted.
We picked the Radeon HD 3450, as it requires relatively low power and is passively cooled. The Seagate hard drive was one of the first business drives validated for 24/7 operation. Since we happened to have three of these drives in our labs, we decided to go with this one, so we can quickly replace a faulty drive should a problem arise, restoring the benchmarking state within a few minutes without changing the type of hard drive.
| System Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Hardware | Details |
| CPU | Intel Core i7 920 (45 nm, 2.66 GHz, 8 MB L2 Cache) |
| Motherboard (LGA 1366) | Supermicro X8SAX, Rev. 1.0 Chipset: Intel X58 + ICH10R BIOS: 1.0B |
| RAM | 3 x 1 GB DDR3-1333 Corsair CM3X1024-1333C9DHX |
| HDD | Seagate NL35, 400 GB (ST3400832NS) 7,200 RPM, SATA/150, 8 MB cache |
| Graphics | ATI Radeon HD 3450 256 MB DDR2 |
| Power Supply | OCZ EliteXstream 800W OCZ800EXS-EU |
| Benchmarks | |
| Power Measurements | h2benchw 3.12 PCMark Vantage 1.0 |
| I/O Performance | IOMeter 2006.07.27 Fileserver-Benchmark Webserver-Benchmark Database-Benchmark Workstation-Benchmark |
| Throughput Testing | IOMeter Streaming Read Test IOMeter Streaming Write Test |
| System Software And Drivers | |
| Drivers | Details |
| Operating System | Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 |
| Intel Chipset Drivers | Chipset Installation Utility 9.1.0.1007 |
| AMD Graphics | Catalyst 8. 12 |
| Intel Storage Drivers | Matrix Storage 8.7.0.1007 |
Component Settings
We installed Windows Vista Ultimate with Service Pack 1 and turned off all maintenance and visual options, as well as SuperFetch, to make sure that performance doesn’t vary due to any of the built-in Windows features. In addition, we switched off all power saving mechanisms for the same reason: performance has to be reproducible. As we found recently, using power saving options does have an impact on performance of the fastest SSDs, such as Intel’s X25-M.
The memory runs at default CL9 timings, which isn’t fast, but again, it doesn’t have to be; reliability was our key priority. We installed all drivers that are typically required to get good performance: ATI’s 8.12 Catalyst release, Intel’s Chipset Installation Utility version 9.1.0.1007 and the Matrix Storage drivers from Intel, version 8.7.0.1007.
- 1 / 2
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- Min spec CPU for HTPC?
- Biggest Bottleneck
- Need suggestions on quality PSU
- Advice on a memory purchase?
- $1500-$1700 build
- can i get help to choose if these parts ive found work well etc
- Im newbie building my first system HELP!!
- Good build for the future?
- I got the 9800 GX2!!!!
- Raid 10 vs 15K SAS
- Old Raptors vs. New Raptors
- how do I know if my HD is operating at sata 3.0?
- High capacity HDD!!!
- Which HDD brand do you recommend?
Related articles
-
Tom's Storage Charts 2009: A New Test Environment
Our old 3.6 GHz Xeon is making way for a brand new X58-based Core i7 solution with PCI-X and PCIe, which we will use to test hard drives, SSDs, controllers, and other storage products. We introduce you to our new reference platform and talk about testing!
-
Find Your Notebook Hard Drive: 2.5" Performance Charts
We've had performance charts for 3.5" desktop hard drives. Today we extend this service and include 2.5" notebook hard drives.
-
Tom's Summer CPU Charts Assault
Intel's Core 2 might be the cure to Pentium pains, but it isn't necessarily the best choice for everyone. We test-drove 83 processors across a 37-benchmark parcours and once again offer the best processor comparison on the web.
Best offers
|
My Book Essential Edition External... | $148.00 ServerSupply.com More info |
|
My Passport Essential 500GB Portable... | $139.99 OfficeMax More info |
|
eGo Desktop Portable 1TB Hard Drive... | $115.99 Dell Home More info |
|
WD Elements External 1.5TB 3.5" Hard... | $129.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
FreeAgent Go Portable 500GB Hard... | $99.99 STAPLES More info |
Partners
The Games selection
violent :
Interactive Buddy
Unwind on your interactive buddy: Do anything you want to him, it will earn you money, and you can buy other stuff to torture him with.
|
crazy :
Xiao Xiao 7
A great fight scene from the animation movies Xiao Xiao.
|
These charts are a disaster. The same exact label is used to denote multiple drives. E.g., Western Digital Raptor or Seagate 7200.11 are each repeated over a half dozen times on each chart. Trying to find a specific model requires you to follow the product link over and over again on each chart. I gave up, still not sure if the one I was interested in is even listed.....
woot charts ! now we need gpu ones ( i dont mind waiting til Q2 is over )
Loving the reinstatement of the 'article index' drop down menu... But I think someone needs to smooth out the rough edges. Minor points, but ones I will make nonetheless.
First, the dimensions are such that you have vertical AND horizontal scroll... kinda annoying.
Second, the 'index button' width is slightly smaller than the actual drop down menu that appears. So if you click the down arrow and move your cursor directly down (which because of the width issue, is not over the drop down menu) it deselects the index and it disappears. ARGGHHH
These charts are a disaster. The same exact label is used to denote multiple drives. E.g., Western Digital Raptor or Seagate 7200.11 are each repeated over a half dozen times on each chart. Trying to find a specific model requires you to follow the product link over and over again on each chart. I gave up, still not sure if the one I was interested in is even listed.....
He's right, and if I select WD and Samsung as filters, and then choose a benchmark, I get all the HDD listed and i have to choose my filters every time I select a benchmark. The old chart system before the site was "pimped" was way better then this.
The charts are bad, but the last version was bad too. The one before that was fine though.
I said we'd get harddrive review this week and lo and behold pappa was right.
I like the drop down menu now... Its much faster :-)
I like the drop down menu now... Its much faster :-)
ye but I'd gladly trade the menu for the old layout with avatars and less gray on gray.
Yay! drop down menu is back!
Yes but we were told we'd have our avatars back?i don't see them ,do you?
yeah avatars would be nice to help break up the monotonous comment section. its just one big blob of text.
WHAT HAPPENED TO OCZ DRIVES!!! Did Intel slip some money under the table?
Yes but we were told we'd have our avatars back?i don't see them ,do you?
Jane said there was a chance, but she didn't promise.
there has to be a better way to do this. all i care about is real world performance. these charts are useless.
The charts are useless if you don't know what you need. Yes. But they wouldn't be useless to most of us if we could see which model was performing how well. I know what I need to care most about is average read speed on all my drives except the system one, where access time is relevant as well.
Ditto on the useless chart theme!!!
No numbers for Intel power consumption!???? what a joke. C'mon Tom's surely you can do better.
I don't get two things.
1. If this is a test bed then shouldn't you be using the fastest CPU available to you? Also I believe the i920 has a 4.8GT/s, so it can be a limiting factor when you are testing other components.
2. Why are you not including the Intel SSD's They have been around for a while and they are still missing from your SSD charts.
No Intel SSD numbers at all! that's got to be the biggest oversight in the history of the universe.