NF7-s 2.0 and Seagates in RAID0

Gardinen · May 6, 2004, 11:04 AM

I tested HDTach (it think that's the name) and got around 95 in read burst speed and like 60000.0 in read speed.
But the graph for sequential speed goes up and down like the rocky mountains. And the CPU usage is around 20%. Is this too much. I have the latest BIOS and drivers from Silicon Image 1.0.0.47

I've checked the graph of other users and it's nearly smooth and CPU usage like 8%

I got 16K in stripe size

Is the results in HDTach any normal??

Vampyromaniac · May 7, 2004, 05:22 AM

the graph and CPU numbers put out by HDTach 2.7 are not what I am used to seeing from my drives.
I don't completely trust version 2.7 . . . HDTach 2.61 gave me more consistent and reliable results.
It might just be me, but it is a suspicion that I have about the software, that perhaps they've made the results less accurate.

That said, your results might be because of fragentation, partitioning, mixed areas of striped/non-striped files.
The CPU usage might be a little high, but it might just be the mobo chipset/drivers, some are just a little higher.

maybe someone else can give more of an answer

May 6, 2004, 11:04 AM	#1
Gardinen DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Trollhättan, Sweden Posts: 512 Rep Power: 0	NF7-s 2.0 and Seagates in RAID0 I tested HDTach (it think that's the name) and got around 95 in read burst speed and like 60000.0 in read speed. But the graph for sequential speed goes up and down like the rocky mountains. And the CPU usage is around 20%. Is this too much. I have the latest BIOS and drivers from Silicon Image 1.0.0.47 I've checked the graph of other users and it's nearly smooth and CPU usage like 8% I got 16K in stripe size Is the results in HDTach any normal??

May 7, 2004, 05:22 AM	#2
Vampyromaniac confutatis maledictis Join Date: May 2002 Location: somewhere dark Posts: 5,974 Rep Power: 77 System Specs	the graph and CPU numbers put out by HDTach 2.7 are not what I am used to seeing from my drives. I don't completely trust version 2.7 . . . HDTach 2.61 gave me more consistent and reliable results. It might just be me, but it is a suspicion that I have about the software, that perhaps they've made the results less accurate. That said, your results might be because of fragentation, partitioning, mixed areas of striped/non-striped files. The CPU usage might be a little high, but it might just be the mobo chipset/drivers, some are just a little higher. maybe someone else can give more of an answer __________________ *Digitalis 3.3* Athlon 64 3000 // ASUS K8V SE Deluxe // 1024MB PC3200 (2-2-2-10 1T) ATI All-In-Wonder 9700 Pro // 20" Dell 2005FPW (DVI) M-Audio Revo 7.1 + Philips Acoustic Edge // Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 320/16 Western Digital WD3200KS + 120/8 Seagate 7200.7 NEC ND-3550A 16x DVD±RW + Lite-On 52x24x CD-RW Antec Sonata case // 480W Antec TruePower personal bests \|\| Aq'3: 46796 \| 3D'01: 20461 \| 3D'03: 6336 \| 3D'05: 2677 \| PC'04: 4605 \| PC'02: 7691,9092,1250