Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
  

Archive 2013 · External hard drive advice for windows vista
  
 
aubsxc
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


WAYCOOL wrote:
Dam math and logic now we will never get an intelligent response. I was really hoping to find out the secret to get a ~20% boost in speed. I'm pretty sure Seagate would pay a very large sum of money to implement this magic to everybody. Isolated to one user in Japan this technological advancement dose them no good.


Maybe he's a prodigy and wrote the firmware for all his computer hardware. That might explain why his 2008 MacPro is 4 years ahead of everyone else's PCs, as he has claimed in the past. Sadly, we may never know



Mar 01, 2013 at 07:24 PM
RDKirk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Alan321 wrote:
No such thing as a reliable drive. It will fail eventually. You need more drives as backups to prevent loss of info.


I'd quibble on the word "reliable" a bit. There is a big difference between a make/model of drive that you can reasonably depend on for a minimum of time compared to one that you can't depend on for any time at all.

It's true that all automobiles eventually wear out, but some makes/models are definitely more reliable right out of the factory and maintain reliability longer than others.

Otherwise, most of this thread would be moot.



Mar 03, 2013 at 05:25 PM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


WAYCOOL wrote:
Dam math and logic now we will never get an intelligent response. I was really hoping to find out the secret to get a ~20% boost in speed. I'm pretty sure Seagate would pay a very large sum of money to implement this magic to everybody. Isolated to one user in Japan this technological advancement dose them no good.

Douchebag...

aubsxc wrote:
Maybe he's a prodigy and wrote the firmware for all his computer hardware. That might explain why his 2008 MacPro is 4 years ahead of everyone else's PCs, as he has claimed in the past. Sadly, we may never know


I didn't mention the benchmark apps I used largely because at the time I posted the 1st reply in this thread I had 3 or 4 other threads with the screenshots already in them. So I (correctly it seems) assumed Waycool (shouldn't that be way uncool?) was just being a douchebag about things. It's also not a 2008 MacPro...

And yeah I might have typed in slightly higher numbers in this thread than the screen shots showed in the then adjacent threads. I don't think the responses I got and am still getting are rational or measured. Being jerks to people is very un cool!

Quoted from the other posts at the time:





http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/Temporary/1_20_13_7_18_AM.png">




Here's what the 2-drive 6TB RAID0 stripes profile like. This is with lots of data already on too.

============================================

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/82/765982.jpg

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/83/765983.jpg

On the black one it was hitting 410 and 420 quite often but I kept missing the
screenshots. There's a newer version of BM that solves this - tho now the drives
are in a 4-drive stripe.

============================================

http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/Temporary/SeagateRAID_Custom_Test.jpg

============================================



In any case these are pretty exciting numbers so you'll have to become human for a moment while I ask you to understand my enthusiasm and excitement. It shouldn't be too hard... Just pretend you're being cruel to someone.

So I would like to reiterate what I replied to you both originally: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1189406/0#11355946


    "Now put two of them in a RAD0 in an INTERNALLY controlled (chipset) MacPro RAID and then you can comment with relevance!

    My average across the first 40% is about 440MB/s (with occasional accesses in the 500MB/s range - just like I said), the next 20% or so is about 400MB/s average and then it drops off after that of course. And this is consistent across ALL my benchmarking tools. I have 6 or 7 of them installed. They can't all be wrong and I'm sure I didn't get "special" drives or anything.
    "



So, now that that's out of the way why don't you both suggest to jaybird555 a nice reliable drive that connects to a Vista box through USB2.0...




Mar 04, 2013 at 10:20 PM
WAYCOOL
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


I've not made any personal attacks yet you can't seem to stop, very mature of you. I say your behavior seemed pathological "being such to a degree that is extreme, excessive, or markedly abnormal" and your latest post only reinforces that. I still don't know how asking about the creditability of a statement or a simple name of the benchmarks is being a jerk but whatever.

There seem to be 2 issues one your unwillingness to name the benchmarks that show a sustained data transfer rate of at least 440 MB/Sec and whether or not these numbers are correct.

You still haven't named 6 or 7 benchmarks that validate your claim. We now now 2 of them as we can see the names in the screen shots. Aja and Blackmagic both of which show less than 400 MB/Sec and don't show over how much of the drive that number is seen. You claim that Blackmagic spike occasionally above 400 MB/Sec speaks nothing of "sustained" numbers at all.

The one screenshot of the graph that was also in the other thread is unnamed unlabelled and worthless as posted, we have no idea what it is showing.

The other is unnamed and shows a average of 401 read and 406 read, and higher maximums. Still not a sustained transfer rate of 440 MB/Sec so dose not support your claims and can't be researched to check its credibility.

Your post only reinforces the fact that your claims are not credible.

It's possible this is a failure to communicate is it possible you just don't know what the word sustained means?

As for an recommendation I've already made it IMHO the OP should get a Seagate Backup Plus 3 TB External hard drive. Though I suggested from Costco though now it seems that they are now about the same price as online $129 for 3tb.




Mar 05, 2013 at 04:16 AM
15Bit
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Stepping back a touch, 400Mb/sec isn't a bad figure, and certainly agrees with the individual drive performance figures.

I've already discussed Bifurcator's figures on another thread, so i won't repeat that here. I would comment though that in the past i have seen more than a 10% difference between different benchmarks.



Mar 05, 2013 at 06:38 AM
WAYCOOL
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


True that its a very good drive and benchmarks can very but the figures just don't fit any other published numbers. Thats why i'd like to know what benches were used but it seems to be a secret. 6 or 7 were said to give results of 440 MB/Sec or more sustained but no evidence of this is available. We don't even know witch to run independent tests with.

All reputable bench marks i've seen give a maximum sustained rate around 200 for a single drive so it seems imposible for 2 drives in a raid to exceed 400 just defies the laws of physics.

But there I go again being a jerk because I'm asking what benchmark gives a result of 440 MB/sec sustained.

Bifurcator make claims and I'm a douchebag when he can't suport them.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/49858-seagate-barracuda-3tb-raid-0-performance-unleashed.html











Mar 05, 2013 at 07:47 AM
aubsxc
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Bifurcator,

thanks for posting the benchmarks. I think I know why some of your numbers are off.

Bench 1:
I don't know what software this is, but if you are using 2MB to 10MB read/write file sizes, all you are doing in hitting the 64MB cache on the drives. For sustained read/writes you need large file sizes so the cache does not influence the results, and you actually test the disk speed.

Bench 2, AJA:
With a 16GB file size you are getting 377 MB/s read, which is right in line with what other people are reporting. Also, the the Seagate 3TB drive is not that great at I/O workloads as the tests show, and are topped by the WD Black and VR drives.

Bench 3, Disk Speed Test:
Again, sustained reads on the order of 360 MB/s, which is consistent with what others are reporting.

Bench 4:
Unknown benchmark. Again, with a 20MB file size all you are doing is testing the cache, and not the disk.



In any case these are pretty exciting numbers so you'll have to become human for a moment while I ask you to understand my enthusiasm and excitement.

I understand your enthusiam, because I feel that way about technology too. The thing is that some people make buying decisions based on what they read at forums like FM, and you want to check your facts before you post so they are not misled.

So, now that that's out of the way why don't you both suggest to jaybird555 a nice reliable drive that connects to a Vista box through USB2.0

If you read my first post in this thread, you will find that I agreed with your recommendation for the new Seagate 3TB 3 platter drives, and that I encouraged the OP to look at using an eSATA or USB3.0 interface for his backup needs since USB2.0 would be slow.

It's also not a 2008 MacPro

That was another thread where you stated that a 2008 MacPro would perform just as well as a PC using technology that was 4 years newer. That is nonsense as I demonstrated using the benchmarks I posted in a followup. Again, posts like these might influence some people into make the wrong buying decisions, which is why I suggest you check the facts before posting.



Mar 06, 2013 at 06:02 PM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


WAYCOOL wrote:
I've not made any personal attacks...


Reeeealy? Hmmm:

    WAYCOOL wrote:
    Bifurcator seems to have a pathological need to stretch the truth when it comes to hardware and his inference that the MacPro has a raid chip and is not simple software RAID if farcical at best. Don't expect a response to your benchmark request his results can't replicated and thus statements would be proven untrue. Something along the line of "those are my results take them or leave them" will be the the response so he can go on believing in his outrageous statements.

    By the way his statements on usb 2 are strangely correct


    WAYCOOL wrote:
    Dam math and logic now we will never get an intelligent response. I was really hoping to find out the secret





Mar 07, 2013 at 12:05 AM
Sunny Sra
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


so what kind of beer do you guys like?


Mar 07, 2013 at 12:30 AM
15Bit
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Sunny Sra wrote:
so what kind of beer do you guys like?


Warm - I'm English



Mar 07, 2013 at 12:59 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


aubsxc wrote:
Bifurcator,

thanks for posting the benchmarks. I think I know why some of your numbers are off.

Bench 1:
I don't know what software this is, but if you are using 2MB to 10MB read/write file sizes, all you are doing in hitting the 64MB cache on the drives. For sustained read/writes you need large file sizes so the cache does not influence the results, and you actually test the disk speed.


That's not quite right. Caches don't work like that AFAIK. For file writes, maybe. For reads, doubtful. And I had the caches turned off in every test. Although I have to admit it's a little confusing what caches are being turned off and which are even able to be turned off.

In any case I completely and totally do not care HOW I got those speeds. All I care is that I get speeds like that with my 15 to 20MB images files. And I do most of the time - with these drive - while I didn't with any other previous drives. So I'm just happy with the results and don't care how it all works. It's interesting to discuss but it's not meaningful IMO. With 2 drives in RAID0 that's 128MB of combined cache and for 4-drive RAID0 it's 256MB. That's about 10 and 20 images respectively. It's also all of the icons from several folders of 2,000 images each - and so on. So please, yes, let us count the cache!

Bench 2, AJA:
With a 16GB file size you are getting 377 MB/s read, which is right in line with what other people are reporting. Also, the the Seagate 3TB drive is not that great at I/O workloads as the tests show, and are topped by the WD Black and VR drives.


OK, but then why all the hits in the 420+ MB/s range all across the graph? The almost 400MB/s writes and the almost 380MB/s reads in the text above are the averages from quite a wide swath of I/O rates. Not only that but one never gets a linear result from multiple drives in RAID0. At least I've never seen it. There's an implied overhead of between 10 and 20MB/s per drive within the stripe. So I was also considering that when talking about these units operated singly. That may have been a mistake in this case. But if so it's the first time I've seen such a linear increase in performance. Another good thing about these drives then... Hmmm, undecided...


Bench 3, Disk Speed Test:
Again, sustained reads on the order of 360 MB/s, which is consistent with what others are reporting.


Doesn't BM do an encode and decode pass on the data-streams? I read that it did. So those speeds are the result of trying to achieve a less synthetic result.


Bench 4:
Unknown benchmark. Again, with a 20MB file size all you are doing is testing the cache, and not the disk.


1)
I understand your enthusiam, because I feel that way about technology too. The thing is that some people make buying decisions based on what they read at forums like FM, and you want to check your facts before you post so they are not misled.

2)
If you read my first post in this thread, you will find that I agreed with your recommendation for the new Seagate 3TB 3 platter drives, and that I encouraged the OP to look at using an
...Show more

1) cool then they would be as stoked as I am.
2) Good on ya bro! We can be Seagate brothers. Now I'm waiting for the SSHD drives to hit the 3TB and 4TB range. 8 or 16GB of intelligent NAND cache... Yeeeahhh-BUDDY!
3) Yeah, sorry to disappoint you but that's actually true. Benchmarks are pretty much meaningless in this regard. It's user experience and how much time one spends doing what needs to be done. I can take a MacPro1,1 from 2006, add 64GB RAM of 800MHz RAM to it, overclock the 8 core 3.0GHz processors to around 3.5 to 3.8 GHz, place the system on an SSD, add in the fastest newest Quadro K5000 which makes a lot more difference in many apps than CPU speeds - for example: http://helpx.adobe.com/en/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html#mercury Force the machine to load 64bit kernel for continued updates, and so on. A RAM Drive in such a system gets 3.5 gigaBYTES per second.

And while a newer system whether your hack-box or the 2012 12-core MacPro, might even double some of those figures the user won't feel it. 3.5 GB/s feels the same to a photographer as 7 GB/s. The most he'll likely ever do while editing is 1 secon'd's worth of I/O per image. And so it is with many other tasks too. At the end of an 8 or 10 hour day he will not have saved 10min at the edit bay between a tricked out 2006 MacPro and the newest over-clocked system you can realistically imagine! I know we both love high-spec speedy systems but this is something most of us guys completely over-look. Remember The MacPro I'm talking about besides the zinggy gfx card has a potential of 8x3GHz (24GHz) computing power natively. A well tuned 8-year-old workstation class system with a cherry picked application selection will kick ass on (or hold its own against) a modern over-clocked desktop grade system anyone here is likely to build, and at a significantly reduced price-point too - that's just a fact. I can't help that one. Some of us may not WANT to believe it because new shinny things are usually more fun to play with than old things but that's just our own personal problem.





Mar 07, 2013 at 01:00 AM
Sunny Sra
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


15Bit wrote:
Warm - I'm English


Which one?



Mar 07, 2013 at 01:37 AM
gpchase
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Here's mine...how do you like these potatos ..
2 Samsung 830's ssd in raid0 through sata III dual pci cards in 2009 MacPro





Edited on Mar 07, 2013 at 02:17 AM · View previous versions



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:00 AM
gpchase
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


But getting back to the op question I would look for a WD Red for reliability as these are "server" grade drives..for cost Hitachi makes a reasonably priced piece and for speed USB3 if you have access to it or a "toaster" with esata.
OWC is a fine resource for good products...and if money is no option ssd's are growing in size with costs coming down



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:11 AM
gpchase
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


BTW this is my disgusting mess...



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:16 AM
Bruce n Philly
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


I don't recommend a single drive.

A bit more complex and expensive, but if you are serious, you should set up a Network Attached Storage (NAS) in a RAID 5 configuration over gigabit Ethernet. This is a pretty standard commercial setup and now available for the home or home office. Read my wright up here:

My Backup and Storage Recommendations

Peace

Bruce in Philly
www.TravelThroughPictures.com



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:24 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


WOW... That is a mess...

Nice speed-demons tho! Pretty sweet! I get almost that with 4 of these 3TB drives. (almost as in a little over a 100MB/s less)



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:27 AM
gpchase
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Bruce..
Very good info here as long as portability is not a necessity but be prepared to drop big $$$



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:28 AM
gpchase
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Bifurcator wrote:
WOW... That is a mess...

Nice speed-demons tho! Pretty sweet! I get almost that with 4 of these 3TB drives. (almost as in a little over a 100MB/s less)


Yup and note I also enjoy watching and burning blue ray as many claimed not possible on a Mac :thumbs



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:31 AM
Sarsfield
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · External hard drive advice for windows vista


Whole bunch of these on this forum:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mactard



Mar 07, 2013 at 02:32 AM
1      
2
       3       4       end




FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password