Show us your hard drive performance

Mark said:

Here's mine, not to bad I guess. :)

Vista HDD
Attachment 4897

Windows 7 HDD
Attachment 4898

Here's mine! Went to the HD Tune site for comparatives! Mine is a Seagate 977GB ST31000333AS ATA Device & i could'nt find a comparable to compare under Seagate. That's why i included Mark's charts for comparison! SSD's performance across the board have been excellent!

The present "platters with read-write heads" are no match to SSDs which are like nuclear-tipped Sidewinder missiles in F16 fighters, b'cause Sidewinders have yet to accqire the nuclear power!

Has anybody made a comparison between SLC and MLC within SSDs? Guess that would be more appropriate!

Regards,
Sreedhav

PS: Never dreamt that i could fit a 1TB portable EXTN.HD into my trouser pocket! That's progress! See, already there are two varities in SSDs, the Single LevelCell which is more stable, faster and costs more, compared to Multi-Level Cell tech.!

here is mine WD MX-250M 500 GB (Raid 1)
My only comfort is that mine is a laptop

Here's mine WD Caviar Black 500GB SATA III idk whats up with the minimum...

This is my maindrive

Not sure why the burst rate is so high on the HD Tune one. At that speed I could shift a lot of files

Work PC : 4x Seagate Cheetah 15,000rpm SAS in RAID0

Palegathon, I'm not sure which ones above you are referring to. But to answer your question, I think the drives with the quickest response times would be best. But, access times are quoted in milliseconds, so with spinning drives I don't believe you can notice a real life difference in 13 and 15 milliseconds. To make a real difference, get an SSD. A good SSD has access times of 0.1 milliseconds, that will make a big difference. If you are not aware, access times are basically the time it takes from the time you press the button until the time the action actually takes place. ie, from the time you press the button to open your web browser until the time it actually opens.