Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 104356	2009-10-25 02:52:00	Win 7 Score - Core i7	pctek (84)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
823971	2009-10-25 21:25:00	A velociraptor as a spare? :crying I want one! I just happened to have it as a relic from a previous comp.	JJJJJ (528)
823972	2009-10-26 01:58:00	velociraptor . Wonder what it would do to rating if I removed it. I don't think you really need to fret too much about your PCs performance. Makes everyone elses look sick.	pctek (84)
823973	2009-10-26 20:51:00	Apparently, the hard disk figure is often crap. This is from Woody Leonard and he quotes the below text. Where Microsoft screwed up the benchmark Microsoft claims that the lower WEI numbers for hard drives reflect more accurately the devices' performance for a large number of Windows users. I have my doubts. The Engineering Windows blog puts it this way: * "An example problematic sequence consists of a series of sequential and random I/Os intermixed with one or more flushes. During these sequences, many of the random writes complete in unrealistically short periods of time (say, 500 microseconds). Very short I/O completion times indicate caching; the actual work of moving the bits to spinning media, or to flash cells, is postponed. After a period of returning success very quickly, a backlog of deferred work is built up. "What happens next is different from drive to drive. Some drives continue to consistently respond to reads as expected, no matter the earlier-issued and postponed writes/flushes, which yields good performance and no perceived problems for the person using the PC. On some drives, however, reads are often held off for very lengthy periods as the drives apparently attempt to clear their backlog of work, and this results in a perceived 'blocking' state or almost a 'locked system.' " In other words, as long as your disk activity falls within the limits of the drive's ability to cache data, you get blindingly fast performance. It's only when you make a whole lot of changes to several big files, save them to the drive in a bunch, and open even more files from the drive at one time that your performance degrades. Sure, there are lots of people who perform this type of operation all the time. If you edit large video files, for example, you'll put a lot of stress on your hard drive. And I don't doubt for a second that Microsoft has all sorts of studies that show how bottlenecks in a hard drive's cache can slam performance. The point is, I don't think the cache-run problem affects most Windows users, most of the time. The new Windows 7 disk-performance number may be a perfectly fine benchmark — in an abstract, mathematical sense. But it has precious little to do with the way I use a computer, day in and day out. As things stand with the Windows 7 benchmark, I wouldn't spend a sou to get a hard drive that scores 5.6 over a hard drive that managed only a 2.9.	linw (53)
823974	2009-10-26 22:12:00	Lame if you ask me. We did about the same with older hardware..... Al systems bottleneck @ 5.9 with the a standard SATA drive!!	SolMiester (139)
1 2