@Speederlander
Makes sense all caching is on, normal running, except av/fwall down & network disabled while testing.That burst is just some caching going on. Someone on this forum looked at this a while back when people were posting insane bursts with their areca cards. It's not really there
Reading round i have seen it said thatJust coming from AMD rig i've no idea if there's any validity in this comment??intel from time to time do tricks with their drivers giving wrong info..
@syne_24
Totally Agree - Which is where i got my original slice size froms for the partition slice, it seems the program is just reading off average throughout the partition. So if you have a shorter partition, the beginning will be faster and your average will be higher just before it starts to dip.
&
What i see as a benefit of matrix is the abilility to have a 2nd raid slice with a different Raid 1,5 tec., to get the best options whilst gaining the benefit of the max number of drives.Post#8
If i set up a 65gn partition on a clean single raid0 & put my primary os on it then i would expect to see a similar performane to my "fast Raid" stripe.
@tuskenraider-
I aren't making any political or propaganda statement, nor am i a believer in any conspiracy theoriesThat showing those benchmarks has nothing to do with actual performance, that perpetuating an uproven theory that Matrix RAID actually increases performance without objective proof is sorta irresponsible? A partition can do the exact same thing but I don't see people claiming how fast their system improved when they've done that? Why, because HD Tach can't benchmark partitions. I'm just a relative newbie to using 1) c2d - new build & 2) Using raid + matrix raid.
Just saying my hd performance feels fasterdon't convey much does it?? Thought others may like to share & the software shots where a reasonable way 2 do it
1st line of this threadFinished the last bit of my upgrade to c2d with 2 more hitachi sata2 80gb
Cheers![]()
Bookmarks