Interesting results...need clarification

[RyanGrob]

So I just recently bought an 8mb 74 GB Raptor on these forums. It works great and I decided to see what it's made of by using HD Tach. I tested the raptor and got 127 mb/s burst with an average read of 65 mb/s. The seek was 7.6ms. Not knowing much about HD's, I think that's pretty good. I then test my Seagate 7200.10 320 GB SATA II HD (Perpendicular Recording) and got some pretty weird results. Can anyone explain this? Pictures below.

http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/4246/raptor74jl8.jpg (Raptor)

http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/8995/seagatexc8.jpg (Seagate 7200.10)

I know the raptor's random access is a lot better, but why is the burst so much better on the Seagate? Sorry if this seems stupid, I just thought these HD's were supposed to be a lot better.

 

[acole1]

your results really arn't strange

read this article... maybe it will shed some light on your situation

basicly the raptor is sata 150 limited.. the 7200.10 is sata 300 limited

 

[BurnItDwn]

Burst speed basicly takes into account dumping the buffer from the drive to the system, it's like a test of the IO pipes, and really has nothing to do with the speed of the drive itself.

The 7200.10 has slightly better read speeds at the beginning of the drive, that makes sense due to it's much greater data density.
The Raptor has better seek times, and less of a slowdown towards the end of the disk, this makes sense due to it's greater rotation speed.

I don't see anything odd from your screenshots.

 

[RyanGrob]

Alright, cool. My knowledge on HD's is very limited so I apologize if this seemed stupid. I just was a bit worried when I saw better scores coming from my Seagate than my new Raptor.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Originally posted by: RyanGrob
Alright, cool. My knowledge on HD's is very limited so I apologize if this seemed stupid. I just was a bit worried when I saw better scores coming from my Seagate than my new Raptor.

It doesn't seem stupid at all.
If it did, I would have neglected to reply