Samsung F1 vs WD AAKS

[Hicks12]

Im unsure if this is true or not but doesnt having a drive as the system drive mean its slower/higher latency? I think this happened on my drive when i was testing it but maybe it doesnt affect it, just thought id through that out there.

[DDY]

I think having an OS on the drive reduces the burst rate, my 750GB F1's burst rate is 30MB/s less than Zaks. Higher CPU usage too.

[Zak33]

yup, being the OS drive AND the one you're testing, slows it a fair bit.

BUT... different SATA controllers manage differently too.

[Zak33]

and the 250aaks...

that's not fast, is it?
That's a quick test too, not a long one

[Hicks12]

i thought it was quite fast for a 250gb , it was a long test unless selecting long on the basic menu isnt right?

[matty-hodgson]

well that blows your 250GB clean out the water


edit: why are both my drives burst speeds the same?

[Hicks12]

not really, 10mb faster(yours) but higher latency and is yours the system drive? Size?

[matty-hodgson]

well 15mb/s
but no, it's not the system drive.
just like.. 80% full of stuff though
only got about 48GB free

i think random access is slower on my PC cos of a crap controller or something.. i dunno

[Hicks12]

my 250 is the system drive and my games drive(well half of it ). So it may outperform yours , ill test it tomorrow under windows 7 as thats installed on my 640gb.

[Webby]

How full the disk is will have no impact on the read speed, having it as the system drive or the page file will have an impact though, ideally test with nothing else running which is using the drive.

I would post up mine but its just embarassing not only are my drives slow but they're noisy as well, when I get some money together I think a couple of 640GB+ drives will be the order of the day.