r_target Posted May 3, 2004 Posted May 3, 2004 I'm a little confused here.Any clues? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTSticky Posted May 3, 2004 Posted May 3, 2004 If I were to guess. It'd be because writes are sequential. Reads are only sequential if the files being read are 100% defragged. /shrug Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_target Posted May 4, 2004 Posted May 4, 2004 Here I changed the "total length"(not sure what that means) to 32 from 4,and got this: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackRussell Posted May 4, 2004 Posted May 4, 2004 If you've got the Seagate with 8mb cache, then it could explain faster writes with lower "total length" of 4mb... @32mb it's 4x the cache so... (and Windows has it's own caching of course, but the bench probably designed to bypass windows caching for true results) But also as mentioned fragmentation on disk along with how much empty space you've got will effect... with tons of empty space new file writes are almost garanteed to be sequential. But I'm no hd expert, just spif balling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_target Posted May 4, 2004 Posted May 4, 2004 Yep,that's my drive-Seagate Barracuda 80GB.60 GB of it is empty still(!) and I defragged it before running the bench. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.