Caviar Black RAID 0 HDTune results

Greetings all,

I just setup raid 0 on x2 1TB WD caviar black drives.

I ran the read test twice, and it gave me this:



I have been reading up on HDTune and I suspect the result is ok but I am not very familiar with hdd access speeds.

Question: Is this what I should be expecting to see?

 

The numbers look really good. Yes, your access time is right on. Nice!

 

Have the same setup and yep I get those numbers too.

 

I increased the average read bandwidth by 50 MB/s on my RAID 0 Caviar Black setup by updating the Intel RST ROM in my BIOS. (Flashed a modded BIOS with newer RST ROM a.k.a Intel RAID ROM)

 

Thanks everyone for comments.

I just tried new bios with updated raid rom and I get almost identical results.

 

you'd better do short stroke while creating partitions in raid bios for lower access time and higher read speeds.. you could get 250mb reads and 7,5ms access time..

 

seem like good speeds to me.... just as a point of reference, here is your raid0 vs my Seagate Barracuda 500Gb (Non Raid)

 

I'm curious to how you did that. Mine is currently running the 10.5. I did just update my BIOS as there was a new one for the upcoming new Intel CPU's but no update for the RAID ROM

 

Not bad, your getting about 75mbps more by doing the RAID. gl

 

Your access time is similar to both of my WD Caviar Black 500GB drives... RAID doesn't effect access times at all. Mine are at 13.5ms in RAID0, RAID1 and individually.... Access time is dependent on the harddrive's integrated controller.

Out of curiousity. What raid controller are you using? Motherboard integrated controller? Cuz uhhh....mine doesn't get anywhere near your Max...

This made me "lol"....

 

my advice type ''short stroke raid 0'' to google and educate yourself.. I am not gonna spend time to tell anything when you say ''lol'' to me..

my results

2x WD Caviar Black 500GB RAID0 Benchies

 

Here's my result as a comparison; 2x 500GB Seagate Barracuda

 

You're too defensive....

 

I am thinking about doing the same setup but have one 1001FALS and one 1002FAEX, will it work? the 2 is the one with the 64mb cache and sata3. Would I have to put both of them on the same sata?

 

Thanks for comments.

Regarding earlier post about short stroking, I'm thinking next time I set the raid up I might not do it. I don't want to lose the space.

What I am probably going to do is partition it so that the OS is closer to the centre, and take the advantage of making the drive do less work. Hopefully get some good results doing this -

anyone tried it?

how did it compare?

I will use the slower outside partition for games most likely, as they are not a big priority.

Yep.

Also as I mentioned earlier, I did a bios update and used a newer version of raid rom, no difference.

Lastly, for anyone who is interested, I have been using this raid 0 set up for a few weeks and it is noticeably faster. It doesn't do much for games, I guess levels load a bit quicker - can't really tell. I use this computer extensively for a lot of work, visual arts, media and media/file streaming & transfer over a network. I also regularly test and compile various large applications which are in development. It is a lot faster, the whole system just feels quicker overall.