Is this a bad thing?

DogSoldierDogSoldier The heart of radical Amish country..
edited December 2003 in Hardware
I'm trying to get my WD HD working as advertised. I have a Maxtor 6E040L0 and a WD WD400JB. Both 40gB, both non-SATA. Now, the Maxtor works wonderfully (I think?) I get 35524kB/s while the WD get's 22912kB/s using Sandra. This doesn't compute, the WD with it's 8 meg cache should - theoretically - beat the Maxtor. Anyways, I have to much free time, so thinking it was because of the ACPI, I installed MPS Multiprocessor PC over it through Device Properties. Now I see 2 "MPS Multiprocessor PC"s listed, and running F@H uses 100% cpu (Rather than the 50% cpu I got used to) It also runs hotter at idle. Load is the same 42 celsius.

So really 3 questions, why does my WD suck? Why does task manager show 100% load when it should show 50%, and why is there 2 "MPS Multiprocessor PC"s?

2.4c @ 3.18ghz 263FSB, WinXP
P4P800 with 1010 Bios MAM Enabled, Performance Disabled
2x256 OCZ Gold DDR500 at 1:1, 2.5-4-4-7
9800 Pro using Cat 3.7s
I also disabled my serial, parallel and gaming ports in Bios. (I don't use them)

Comments

  • GHoosdumGHoosdum Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    Are you running the HDDs off the same cable when you check? There might be a broken lead in the WD's cable if they're different, leading to data loss/loss of transfer rate.

    What's the master/slave status of the 2 drives, and IDE channels, etc?
  • DogSoldierDogSoldier The heart of radical Amish country..
    edited December 2003
    Same cable, aye. Both drives set to cable select. IDE setting in Bios is Enhanced, P-ATA+S-ATA. Both at UDMA 5 although the Maxtor can go 6, the P4P800 can only do 5.

    edit// Should mention this, I just installed the XPSP1 CD over XP. I was having problems with the AGP driver, it was only after I installed the OS that I noticed that PS2 Mouse was set to auto. Turned it off and Voila.. Bios recognized my AGP. Weird, that there'd be a conflict considering I have most of my legacy **** turned off... That and theres tons of USB drivers running... I predict a format and fresh install in my future.
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    NO, cache is an advantage with large files. SEEK time and reliability are the ohter major factors. I use WD beacuse I know many fewer folks who have returned WDs than Maxtors, and they last longer. And large cache drives for things like Linux which CAN burst and fully use the cache, it likes to delay write and crashes so little I let it, and it bunch writes which uses the cache BETTER than XP does. Sandra is also biased toward DMA, and WDs run best as LBA plus block and test low on that bench set. Sandra uses small files, relative to the cache, and that leaves the true cache advantage masked. Linux gets 38K in throughput on WD JB series drives, versus about what you get for Sandra. Because it is tuned for large file writes adn large chunked writes.

    For something slightly less biased in that one regard, look at FutureMark's bench set. They are in, of all places, New Zealand, and kinda market independent and wanted something that would let folks compare Intel's to AMDs with same or similar software set, and have a library of benches sent in by users with system specs. I first tried their stuff in about 2001 and they have improved since, but please ignore the fact that the benches will not 3D to DX 9 yet, that is next fix in works from them. I actually told the lead dev and owner to contact Symantec, and suggested Symantec pick up their bench test, a year before Symantec adopted it in large part.

    Trials free, pay for use over long time or get Norton SystemWorks for unlimited use as well as some useful utils if you tell it NOT to install Norton System Doctor. Compare and contrast Sandra results from tweaks with FurtureMark results, you will see what I mean. But Sandra is neat for getting things other than storage in your case tuned and guides more. I do a RUN BOTH and not a substituion, work for a balance on a mixed vendor stroage system like you have. Keep the games and movies on the WD, you will get a large file advantage that way. Boot from the Maxtor. AND, if can, give each brand a separate IDE channel to live on unless you have a slower burner or DVD. The WD is neat for building ISO and CD images on also, it likes large volume throughput.

    Mactor IDEs are tuned for many small files, what most folks use, mostly, and for that seek time is key. Keep the WD defragged and it will fly, the Maxtor will care to a lesser degree about fragging (more small chunk tuned). So that makes it a neat boot volume for XP. PLEASE do not make a logical volume of those two drives.

    John.
Sign In or Register to comment.