Jump to content

hard drive working at max transfer speed?


RADEON

Recommended Posts

I just got my new build up and running and I need some advice.

 

My mother board is the gigabyte 890fxa-ud5. The chip set drivers that came on the driver cd contain only the catalyst control panel.

 

As far as i know the control center is not a chip set driver. On gigabytes website it is the same thing. The download link gives you catalyst control center.

 

I suspect that my hard drive is not working at maximum transfer speeds. It is a sata 6 hard drive, and I have it plugged into a sata 6 plug on my mother board.

 

But windows only says it has a score of 5.9 on there index. That just surprised me. And seeing as I can not tell if I have the correct chip set drivers installed,

 

I am getting the feeling that things are not working as fast as they should be.

 

Any one got any advice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mechanical drives, even stroked ones, only get a max of 5.9 in windows score. Nothing to worry about, download HD Tune and run the Benchmark and post up a screenshot when you're done :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mechanical drives, even stroked ones, only get a max of 5.9 in windows score. Nothing to worry about, download HD Tune and run the Benchmark and post up a screenshot when you're done :)

 

I don't know how to get a screen shot of it but my max transfer rate was 136 mb/sec.

 

My average was 105 mb/sec.

 

And my minimum was 64.8 mb/sec.

 

That all seem normal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how to get a screen shot of it but my max transfer rate was 136 mb/sec.

 

My average was 105 mb/sec.

 

And my minimum was 64.8 mb/sec.

 

That all seem normal?

Yes, what kind of access time did you get?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you were expecting a SATA III drive to achieve 6GB/s just because its plugged into a SATA III port.

 

Problem is, the drive just goes as fast as the drive goes. The extra bandwidth is there, but its just not used. A mechanical hard drive doesn't top out at even SATA II speed transfer limits.

 

Think of it like a speed limit and a car. Even if the speed limit is 300 mph, if you're driving a Ford Pinto it doesn't really matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of it like a speed limit and a car. Even if the speed limit is 300 mph, if you're driving a Ford Pinto it doesn't really matter.

Lies, it does matter. Because then there'd be opportunites for epic pinto explosions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you were expecting a SATA III drive to achieve 6GB/s just because its plugged into a SATA III port.

 

Problem is, the drive just goes as fast as the drive goes. The extra bandwidth is there, but its just not used. A mechanical hard drive doesn't top out at even SATA II speed transfer limits.

 

Think of it like a speed limit and a car. Even if the speed limit is 300 mph, if you're driving a Ford Pinto it doesn't really matter.

 

I was expecting sata III speeds. but I do under stand what you are saying. I did not know that mechanical drives had that limitation.

 

I guess I will have to get an ssd drive then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, sorry man. Wish it was that easy.

 

Otherwise we would all just forget about $200 SSDs with 120GB of space and go for all those 500GB SATA III drives for $60 :-)

 

Its kind of a dirty marketing thing they are doing with the SATA III physical drives... there are very few situations a 7200 RPM drive would ever benefit from it (and I believe those situations would have to be RAID configurations... effectively negating the point of not just getting a SSD).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its kind of a dirty marketing thing they are doing with the SATA III physical drives... there are very few situations a 7200 RPM drive would ever benefit from it (and I believe those situations would have to be RAID configurations... effectively negating the point of not just getting a SSD).

Eh, you could say the same thing about the original SATA -> SATA II transition. Few (if any) mechanical HDDs ever performed much differently with SATA II.

 

So...while not beneficial to HDDs, I still would choose a SATA III drive over SATA I or II at the same price point. Why not? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...