Angry_Games Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 lol man i remember the loud butt volcano heatsinks on my AthlonXP...i cant say I miss them much if at all Ti4200 is STILL a good card.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
510kut Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 haha yea I get by with it. its fine for CS not so good for source and far cry and such... not to mention the fan crapped out.. so I went to buy a replacement lovely guy at frys tells me the one i got would fit... except it doesnt so now I have to thermal taped to my vid card eheh. lol i do you know how many dbs it is? I'm just curious as to how much louder it is then the current hsf. I have this thing on all the time but whenever its off its sooo eerily quiet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoken Joe Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 I still user my t1 4200. You should try the benches out and post unless you dont want to know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 Do you think the Hitachi 160gb sata II is just as fast or faster or slower than the 80gb? The random acess time is a little better on the 160gb 8.5ms compared to 8.8ms Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorrento Posted July 21, 2005 Posted July 21, 2005 From experience between Seagate 120 and 160 gb, the 160's are faster... at least when they are set in RAID-0. I always thought bigger meant faster, but now with the 80 gb I am not sure... at least the 160 gb should be the same in my opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
red930 Posted July 22, 2005 Posted July 22, 2005 The 160 has two platters versus the single platter in the 80. This allows the data to appear closer together to the controller which results in higher throughput. I haven't measured the 160's yet but if it follows the normal progression it will be at least a little faster and probably quite a bit faster. From experience between Seagate 120 and 160 gb, the 160's are faster... at least when they are set in RAID-0. I always thought bigger meant faster, but now with the 80 gb I am not sure... at least the 160 gb should be the same in my opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorrento Posted July 22, 2005 Posted July 22, 2005 Yeah, even with out testing the Hitachi SATA II 160gb hard drive looks better on paper... probably two of these in RAID-0 will perform better than two 80gb ones. Maybe the Seagate I know had a similar diference and thus the 160 gb were faster as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry_Games Posted July 22, 2005 Posted July 22, 2005 ahh....2 hitachi sata2 160gb's in raid-0 on the nvraid controller, and 2x320gb hitachi's in raid-1 on the si3114 controller... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Posted July 22, 2005 Posted July 22, 2005 Do you think the Hitachi 250gb sata II is just as fast or faster or slower than the 160gb? The random acess time is the same on the 250gb 8.5ms compared to 8.5ms lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
red930 Posted July 22, 2005 Posted July 22, 2005 See this post for more info... http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showpost.p...1&postcount=424 Replace "160" with "250" and "two" with "three". Everything else will stay the same. Do you think the Hitachi 250gb sata II is just as fast or faster or slower than the 160gb?The random acess time is the same on the 250gb 8.5ms compared to 8.5ms lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawngnome Posted July 22, 2005 Posted July 22, 2005 Even'n folks! As soon as the equity loan closes, I will be getting my hands on some delicious nf4 action! I was originally thinking of doing 4 drives in raid-5 on the sil 3114, but this thread has persuaded me to use the Hitachi sata II drives on the nf4 controller. Has anyone benchmarked 4 of those bad boys in 0+1? If not, I will give it a try here in the next month or two Adios Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
red930 Posted July 22, 2005 Posted July 22, 2005 If you setup four drives in RAID-0+1, I would be interested in the results. To save a few bucks on the setup, I would look at using at least two of the SATA II drives on the nVidia controller in RAID-0 for maximum performance. Then you can use a single large drive for backup and storage. Even'n folks! As soon as the equity loan closes, I will be getting my hands on some delicious nf4 action! I was originally thinking of doing 4 drives in raid-5 on the sil 3114, but this thread has persuaded me to use the Hitachi sata II drives on the nf4 controller. Has anyone benchmarked 4 of those bad boys in 0+1? If not, I will give it a try here in the next month or two Adios Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now