Also, your post is not entirely correct. In fact, the testing does random and sequential tests on both read and write performance.
good point, I would have expected random and sequential for read and write; I just didn't make the connection when I read it ( I should have assumed that based on the fact winsat refers to it as an I/O test)
so in way the harddrive test is really 4 tests
random read
random write
sequential read
sequential write
and flush performance
SSD and SSD based RAID will get the best scores for this set of tests
I personally wish the test would also include a subscore with sustain-read and sustain-write
[was it really worth getting sarcastic with me over?] that's just the way I am...especially on weeks when it seems a number of people missed something I said. I can also see my first point could have been more precise....
No hard feelings, man. I just felt like it came out of nowhere, since there was nothing intended to be malicious in my comments about my array.
I agree, a sustain read / write test would be useful - in this case, my setup may not seek as fast as a single SSD, but it sure as hell sustains reading and writing at higher speeds. The overall score is a bit misleading in that regard.
I agree, a sustain read / write test would be useful - in this case, my setup may not seek as fast as a single SSD, but it sure as hell sustains reading and writing at higher speeds. The overall score is a bit misleading in that regard.
In the sense that the Index is supposed to serve as a reference for the average user, I don't think it is at all misleading. The average user has far more to gain from low access times and especially random seek times than from transfer rates beyond say, 150MB/s.
That having been said, I do wish that the index would give more specific results when requested.
In the sense that the Index is supposed to serve as a reference for the average user, I don't think it is at all misleading. The average user has far more to gain from low access times and especially random seek times than from transfer rates beyond say, 150MB/s.
That having been said, I do wish that the index would give more specific results when requested.
you can get a little more specific information if you run your own winsat tests rather then using the composite test.
as more media is entering the average users life; Transfer rates are becoming more importaint to everyone.
So I splurged on a Newegg deal and got myself 2 SSD drives about a week ago. I didn't set them up in a raid but I did install my main OS on the first drive & use the other drive for all my programs & games.
Nice!! Intel onboard raid? I wish AMD had better onboard raid. Hopefully I'll be getting a highpoint controller soon, and two more 30gb vertex's.
Yes, the Vertex are on the ICH10R for now. I have a 3Ware 9690 but was getting constant I/O errors with the Vertex. It seems their firmware is not SSD friendly yet.
i run a 750g Seagate 3g/s SATA...makes me sadface. But im not about to go buy a raptor for the sake of my ePeen
Any spindle drive outside of certain RAID configurations is going to hold you in the sub 6.0 range, because of the 16k random seek test. SSDs happen to excel at this type of operation, firmly slamming all spindle drives in the WEI. If you look at the detailed scores, I'd be willing to bet you've got a pretty decent score on everything but that one mark for the HDD.
Comments
good point, I would have expected random and sequential for read and write; I just didn't make the connection when I read it ( I should have assumed that based on the fact winsat refers to it as an I/O test)
so in way the harddrive test is really 4 tests
random read
random write
sequential read
sequential write
and flush performance
SSD and SSD based RAID will get the best scores for this set of tests
I personally wish the test would also include a subscore with sustain-read and sustain-write
[was it really worth getting sarcastic with me over?] that's just the way I am...especially on weeks when it seems a number of people missed something I said. I can also see my first point could have been more precise....
I agree, a sustain read / write test would be useful - in this case, my setup may not seek as fast as a single SSD, but it sure as hell sustains reading and writing at higher speeds. The overall score is a bit misleading in that regard.
In the sense that the Index is supposed to serve as a reference for the average user, I don't think it is at all misleading. The average user has far more to gain from low access times and especially random seek times than from transfer rates beyond say, 150MB/s.
That having been said, I do wish that the index would give more specific results when requested.
you can get a little more specific information if you run your own winsat tests rather then using the composite test.
as more media is entering the average users life; Transfer rates are becoming more importaint to everyone.
Nice!! Intel onboard raid? I wish AMD had better onboard raid. Hopefully I'll be getting a highpoint controller soon, and two more 30gb vertex's.
Here's mine. The HDD score fluctuates from a 6.9 to a 7.2.
OCZ Vertex 60GB: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227394
OCZ Vertex 30GB: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227393
But the best part about it was the point jump in my Windows Index score in a non raid setup.
Yes, the Vertex are on the ICH10R for now. I have a 3Ware 9690 but was getting constant I/O errors with the Vertex. It seems their firmware is not SSD friendly yet.
i run a 750g Seagate 3g/s SATA...makes me sadface. But im not about to go buy a raptor for the sake of my ePeen
Any spindle drive outside of certain RAID configurations is going to hold you in the sub 6.0 range, because of the 16k random seek test. SSDs happen to excel at this type of operation, firmly slamming all spindle drives in the WEI. If you look at the detailed scores, I'd be willing to bet you've got a pretty decent score on everything but that one mark for the HDD.