I think it's where large files are stored.Quote:
Originally Posted by NightCrawler™
I think my drops are the areas where my games are
Printable View
I think it's where large files are stored.Quote:
Originally Posted by NightCrawler™
I think my drops are the areas where my games are
been waiting almost a week now for the diamondmax firmware.. I cant even install xp it's so bad. how long did it take to get the new FW from em? can someone pm me if you know a better address or method of getting it out of em? maxtor support plain blows
I never actually got the firmware coz apparently my current firmware is fine for nf4 :stick:
Maxtor smells, I can't even get an advanced rma because you NEED a powermax code that says the hdd is faulty and you can't even run it on nf4. why don't they just :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing update the dam version!
I HATE MAXTOR!!!!!
interesting reads, I've yet to see anything from other manufactures. while the following doesn't releate at all to your maxtor problems, here is a sampling of what other drives and controllers can do.
This first batch is from my server. Its a Tyan s2892 based on the NF Professional chipset.
First up is the boot drive, Its a 34gb ultra 320 scsi 15k rpm. the controller is a HP 532 storageworks. notice the latency (random access). the spikes i attribute to it being a boot drive and where HD Tach is installed.
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/h...32.scsi320.jpg
Second up is a 250gb sata300 NCQ Hitachi. This is where the tests get interesting. Seems there's alot of WD fanbois out there for the perfrormance per buck ratio, my money is on these Hitachis. And no, out of the 100's of these Hitachi's i've installed in customers computers, they don't fail. I think i've had to replace one, and it was because a faulty PSU took out the whole system.
I should put a caviat in here though. The controller the next few are attached to is a PCI-X based SAS/SATA controller. Fairly high end, made by and based on the adaptec AIC-9410w chip.
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/h...daptec.sas.jpg
Next up, same controller but 80gb sata300 Hitachi.
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/h...daptec.sas.jpg
Again, same: Hitachi sata300 160gb, but slightly older model/firmware
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/h...daptec.sas.JPG
Now for something a bit more applicable, This is a 4 way raid 5 on the embeded NF4 sata controller. The drives are identical to the above mentioned 250gb sata300 Hitachi's.
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/h...t.nf4raid5.jpg
Truly some interesting results. I wasn't aware that the controller had so much to do with it. Notice the clean swaths on the sequential reads from the Adaptec controller. Fairly expected cpu usage as well for an offboard processor. I guess thats why its a server card, those precious cpu cycles are not wasted.
This all got me thinking, How about some tests on my workstation? Here is the ULIRaid on my CFX3200. A raid0 array using the sata300 version of the Hitachi 160gb drives.
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/h...li.sata300.JPG
Woa! not to good. How about a single sata150 250gb Hitachi?
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/h...li.sata150.jpg
crap, the uli blows. But before i pass judgment, i think i need to do some apples to apples comparison. I'll first raid up 2 of the 250gb sata300 in a raid0 on the Adaptec sas card. then bring that over to the NF4, and finally to the workstation to compare results. Should be interesting. Stay tuned.
-Butter
This is from NGO, problem is how to locate the firmware patch :-sQuote:
It seems that there is a serious compatibility issue between some of the Maxtor DiamondMax 9/10 SATA series with an early firmware revision and some nForce4 based motherboards. Some of the effected motherboards are the ASUS A8N series, the DFI LAN Party NF4, and some MSI nForce4 based boards. The problem lies between onboard SATA controller and the hard drive. The workaround is a firmware upgrade for the hard drive. However, we tried to grab the update and for some reason Maxtor gave us a hard time when trying to locate it. For unknown reasons, they are not offering the update on their website. This is a pretty nasty move. The compatibility issue can cause data corruption, random lock ups, disappearance of the Hard disk, and read/write issues which may lead to a serious data lose. If you are experience it, try to look for a certain BIOS update, if you can’t find it, you will have to replace the hard disk or use a 3rd party SATA Controller. Maxtor, you have a website with download section. Use it, instead of giving your customers a hard time.
Oh and here's the test subject. Notice the sas card in the second pic. Its 8pt capable, but i need to find some sas to scsi cables. These tests certainly give me some motivation.
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/server/1.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~butterfry/server/4.jpg
:banana::banana::banana::banana: it, I'm getting a new drive.. firmware didn't do it, drivers didn't do it, new board didn't do it (though that's not why I got the new board :rolleyes: ).
What do you guys recommend? I want 250GB, you think Hitachi or Seagate will be better? If Seagate, 7200.8 or 7200.9? Also how am I gonna copy my current hdd to the new one? Thanks for any help :rolleyes:
I use acronis TrueImage to copy. the new versions work with NF4 raid, and of course regular single drive controllers.
As far as the drive performance is conserned, as you can see above, i'm biased :slapass: but you can't beat the bang for buck with Hitachi. Thats my 2c.
I should have made a new post out of all that above. I'm having pangs of guilt for userping the thread. Maybe when i do the 2xr0 tests i'll move it all.
-butter
It's no problem, you're doing all us maxtor owners a favor by convincing us to get new drives. Hope I can nearly break even by selling this
edit: check what I just found- http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200601/250_3.html
gg maxtor :rolleyes:
edit2: nvm, if you read on, maxtor does pretty well. Seems access times aren't a big deal
cool,
Its good info none the less. If my primary results hold up, it really shows the lackadaisical approach desktop board mfgrs take to the hd controllers they try to pass off as enthusiast class. Truly we'll all agree that the biggest bottleneck right now is these antiquated mechanical beasts that we all rely on.
I'll probably move it anyhow so others can see and form an outraged mob to lynch the perpetrators.
-Cory
nice, I'm getting fired up now. I've got a huge selection of 500's 400's and on down from all the mfgrs at the office. (oh the joys of being a system builder) I'll have to bring a few crates home to test out for yall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Repoman
EDIT: Ok, so I've decided to make this a full meal deal. I'm evolving my review/tests over here http://www.flickerdown.com/forums/showthread.php?t=243 for those of you that want to contribute. My plans are to bring home a bunch of different controllers that go across my desk over the next few weeks. I'll be posting a final expose` in a stand alone thread once all the data is compiled.
Carry on with your maxtor blasting :P
got a few questions about the scores.
does ur acces time and read speed worsen when u got alot of data on them and when they r put into several partitions?
This depends on a few factors and a few facts about the way drives access data.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starscream
fact 1. the begining of the platter is always a faster access/seek time. This is a phyiscal limitation. simply put, there is more space to cover on the edges of a platter as the circle gets bigger.
Fact 2. When a partitioned drive is near capacity and is fragmented, testing applications like HD Tach are subject to the same. HD Tach reads/writes test files with which it uses for its work. If the file system finds that the data needs to be broken up (fragmentation) then your times will be slower. This leads to the perception that drives are slower when full. This isn't the case, it just has to retreive this file from multiple locations, adding seek time onto your scores.
With those facts in mind, I think it may answer your questions.
-butter
ya it explains :)
i got 3 HDs
1 SATA Hitachi T7k250
a PATA Maxtor Diamond max 10 250GB
and a SATA older Samsung 160GB
the maxtor:
Random access 14ms
Average read 47.5MB
Burst speed 122.1MB
wich is nice seeing it has 2 partitions wich r both fragmented and got alot of data on them.
Samsung:
Random access 13.4
Average read 48MB
Burst speed 124.5MB
i use this one to download its badly fragmented and has alot of stuff onit.
Its my OS HD wich im dissapointed with
a Hitachi Deskstar T7K250
It has 2 partitions onit one has barely any data onit and the other has Windows installed onit.
The windows instalation is fragmented but stil alot of room left.
scores:
Random access 12.5ms
Average read 56.1MB
Burst speed 132.5MB
It looks like you haven't upgraded it to SATA II yet. One quirk of these Hitachi drives is that they're not natively set to the sata 2 spec. IF your drive is new enough you can boot to a downloadable CD from hitachi and change this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starscream
Hey everyone, I had a chat with greg over at HD Tach (simplisoftware.com) about some of the results I've been seeing.
You guys really need to disable any CnC when testing, and be sure that you've applied the dual core patch if applicable to your system. Seems there is a serious bug in windows that doubles the system clock when benching hard drives among other things. The reported results to HD Tach are exactly double (or 1/2 in access times) what the reality is.
This only applies to dual core or dual socket systems.
-butter
I got 13.2 and 13.4ms random access time on my maxtor DM10 SATA-150.
Here's a pic of a bench:
http://img184.imageshack.us/img184/7343/hdtach7fq.jpg
never had probs with maxtor so far...
Here`s mine Maxtor DM10 Sata 150
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/4440/hdtach5hc.jpg
And does anyone know what testbed -> HD controller StoragReview uses to compare HDs ?
RPGWiZaRD
What BIOS was on mobo at the time this test was conduct ?
I`m on FX-60 Beta atm.
I your drive partioned ?
Are these last two benches considered slow or normal?
first- normal
second- slow.
If you'll check out the link though, you'll see that even though maxtor supposedly has :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty access times, they still perform like everything else
thread update.
i got powermax to run on nf4!!
I used TMOD's bios cd which has powermax on it and it worked first go.
BUT.. it says my drive is fine :(
so I can't get an RMA :(
anyone know how to make some bad sectors so I can RMA it? LOL :p: (yes I'm serious.. lol)
Using Tony's 704-2bt bios, nForce 6.70 drivers with storage driver installed. The hdd isn't partitioned but when I did that benchmark there was only 700MB free on that drive. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooper
I've got several maxtors and none have suffered from unusual slow performance, maybe I'm lucky. (My favs are WDs in the budget series tho.)
Well I've read that there might be a firmware problem with Maxtor & nF4, thought it only applied to SATA2 tho.
Run partition magic and change sector size (PM8 can do that on a full hd too) while let Windows screensaver pop up. Yes it can f*ck up sectors since windows froze and I had to press reset, so I guess that's one easy way to do it, change sector size and then restart the comp in middle of the process. Since then I haven't forgot to turn off the #"ยค"# screensaver after every format/windows reinstall.Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrywild