Show Us Your WEI

[boomstick]

At first my HDD score was 3.0 and then made the change mentioned and it improved. Another two gigs of memory would be nice. Here is my score:

 

[element4life3]

Here's mine!!

 

[Freelancer852]

Here we go... I need to get a SSD for my OS drive soon...

 

[hkancyr]

An SSD RAID would probably take you over 6.0.

 

[fireman604]

Raid 5

Raid 5 with 5 10,000 rpm raptors and a PCI X raid card 64 bit only get it too 5.9.

 

[Freelancer852]

An SSD RAID would probably take you over 6.0.

OCZ Core Series V2 SATA II 2.5in Solid State Drive, 60GB at Memory Express Computers

Two of those with tax are $629.98, and I assume you mean placing them in RAID 0... I'm not sure I'm ready to go that far yet, or drop that amount of cash on two 60GB Drives... However, when the price/size ratio becomes more tolerable, yes.

 

[darkassain]

Raid 5 with 5 10,000 rpm raptors and a PCI X raid card 64 bit only get it too 5.9.

now that i cannot believe.....:huh:

one drive ( a 7200 rpm i believe) gets me a 5.4...

if you can post your wei and prove me then i will be shocked....

 

[fireman604]

5 raptors raid 5

Drive C is 5 raptors in raid 5 I use a Highpoint raid card on a Tyan 2885 mother board see specs. I believe I had posted before but here it is again.

 

[darkassain]

Drive C is 5 raptors I use a Highpoint raid card on a Tyan 2885 mother board see specs. I believe I had posted before but here it is again.

ok so this hardware raid or software raid (since you didnt post the model # i cant tell)??

It is also important to notice that cards from RocketRAID 2000 series aren’t 100% hardware-based –some processing is still done by the system CPU and that is why they are also called “software RAID” cards. Only cards from RocketRaid 3000 family are 100% hardware-based and that is why they are more expensive. Hardware-based cards also provide on-board memory cache to increase performance, which also increases the final price. Just as an example, RocketRAID 3510 also features four SATA ports but costs around USD 300, more than double – this other card is 100% hardware-based, has 256 MB memory cache and supports RAID 6

either way im shocked (and thanks for proving me wrong...)

 

[TechCP]

I'm getting a 6.0 with a single hard drive. I'm not too sure that 5 RAID 0's wouldn't take you any higher.

 

[ramoine]

Only running 2gig of ram for now , not bad .

 

[hkancyr]

I just put the Nvdia video drivers in to see how they rate. My score went up to 6.0. the strange thing is the HDD score also went up to 6.0??
Freelancer: I saw some extreme computer video that had 4 large SSD's in a RAID 0 and they didn't give any numbers but they alluded to the fact that the transfer rates were incredible. I would say this would be a "money no object" sort of exercise. I am retired and money is an object for me.
Here is the 181.20 score.

 

[relax]

hmm rly need to do somthing about my ram

 

[Forman]

Mine

Too bad with 5.9 being the max score on HDD and RAM. Got 2x 10K RPM Raptors in RAID0

EDIT: I see some of you have over 5.9 on HDD and RAM. How?

For me there is no difference between running the RAM at 667Mhz CL5 and 1050Mhz CL4. I get 5.9 either way.

 

[Draves]

Hrmmm....

I got a 5.9 overall because of my ram

Specs~
M3a78 Pro Mobo
Phenom 9950 oc to 3.0
2*2gbs ram (forgot what kind but its 1066)
8800GTS 640mb
4*32GB RiData SSD's Raid 0.
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Beta 7000

Okay so my Raid 0 set up reads at about 380 Mb/s and writes at about 250 and I only get a 7.4? Pssh. Show me something faster. Seems a little screwy. And then a phenom gets a 7.3? Nonsense, it should be lower. There are already 6 core chips out and the i7 is way faster than the phenoms, but my crazy raid setup is what, semi outdated? Grr to that. Its going to take at least a year to build a rig that maxes the new index out. I could always grab two more ssd's and max out my controller :devil: (I'm waiting for am3 and trichannel before I do another big upgrade.)

So what do you think a 7.9 is on the hard drive scale?

 

[Forman]

I got a 5.9 overall because of my ram

Specs~
M3a78 Pro Mobo
Phenom 9950 oc to 3.0
2*2gbs ram (forgot what kind but its 1066)
8800GTS 640mb
4*32GB RiData SSD's Raid 0.
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Beta 7000

Okay so my Raid 0 set up reads at about 380 Mb/s and writes at about 250 and I only get a 7.4? Pssh. Show me something faster. Seems a little screwy. And then a phenom gets a 7.3? Nonsense, it should be lower. There are already 6 core chips out and the i7 is way faster than the phenoms, but my crazy raid setup is what, semi outdated? Grr to that. Its going to take at least a year to build a rig that maxes the new index out. I could always grab two more ssd's and max out my controller :devil: (I'm waiting for am3 and trichannel before I do another big upgrade.)

So what do you think a 7.9 is on the hard drive scale?

I dont know if windows tests the write performance, but if it does it could explain why you "only" get 7.4
Except from Intels SSD all/most SSD have a problem when it comes to random write.
When doing random write the IOPS falls like a brick. At 4Kb and 8Kb we are talking write speed way below 1MB/s.

When I saw this it became very clear why the Intel is charging $6-700 for their 80GB SSD.
Lets hope OCZ gets their Vertex 2 drives on the market soon. We need some competition. Hopefully their planned launch in late Q1 2009 is on schedule.

 

[darkassain]

I dont know if windows tests the write performance, but if it does it could explain why you "only" get 7.4
Except from Intels SSD all/most SSD have a problem when it comes to random write.
When doing random write the IOPS falls like a brick. At 4Kb and 8Kb we are talking write speed way below 1MB/s.

When I saw this it became very clear why the Intel is charging $6-700 for their 80GB SSD.
Lets hope OCZ gets their Vertex 2 drives on the market soon. We need some competition. Hopefully their planned launch in late Q1 2009 is on schedule.

most ssd's that are for out for the mainstream market use MLC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_cell

intel's (and enterprise class SSD's) use the more expensive but faster SLC

Single-level cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


and actually the OCZ's SATAII 64 is a remarkable piece of equipent...
this is a example of how SLC is more efficient and faster than almost anything for the price...

 

[Forman]

most ssd's that are for out for the mainstream market use MLC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_cell

intel's (and enterprise class SSD's) use the more expensive but faster SLC

Single-level cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know the Intel X25-E uses SLC, but I was talking about the mainstream models. Intel X18-M and X25-M both uses MLC

 

[darkassain]

I know the Intel X25-E uses SLC, but I was talking about the mainstream models. Intel X18-M and X25-M both uses MLC

i see what you are reffering to...

wow i guess this is the bottleneck

The SSD's controller manages both the flash memory and the data flow to and from the host. To write 1GB of data, competing SSDs need to write 20 to 40 times that amount of data to actually complete the 1GB write. Data gets written in blocks into both DRAM and the flash memory, and by the time you're done with one operation, you've actually written, in a common example, 32GB of data to change 1GB of data. And the complex process bogs down the movement of data through the SATA II bus controller, too.

With its new SSDs, Intel has changed the write strategy by introducing its write amplification technology. Write amplification is defined as the amount of NAND flash writes performed for a requested amount of data writes from the host computer. Instead of requiring 32 times the write cycles, as in the example above, the multiplier is now only 1.1 (or slightly less, according to Intel) - and the amount of overhead has been dramatically decreased, too.

Intel rates its drives for five years of useful life, assuming up to 20GB of data written each day. The company also rates its drives for 1.2 million hours mean time between failure - a spec that hard drive companies typically release only for their enterprise-class drives (Intel's spec is competitive with enterprise-class hard drives).

 

[Draves]

When Vista came out the 5.9 score was the fastest current hardware at the time of release. What do you think 7.9 compares to that's already out? Also, do you think a hard drive raid would smoke a ssd raid set up?

More questions~any idea what an intel i7 with tipple channel ram rates at?