Curse

Pasha the Mighty · Mar 15, 2008, 09:52 AM // 09:52

I heard the samsungs with 750gb of storage (or the 1TB versions...) are really good, they aren't as fast as a raptor, but they're probably the next best thing, if you don't want to pay through the nose for a high amount of storage. They have 32mb of cache, twice as much as most hdd's have i believe, and you can get a 750gb version here for 95 euros

Snograt · Mar 15, 2008, 01:27 PM // 13:27

Meanwhile, back to the original saga

Got the memory and the Vista Ultimate through the post - next day delivery from two separate companies at the same time!

If you don't hear from me for the next day or so, it's because I've royally screwed up. Backup time - last time I did a backup, it involved around fifty floppies

Wish me luck!

Admael · Mar 15, 2008, 06:19 PM // 18:19

I trust Samsung for a lot of things, their monitors, TVs, cellphones, but not their hard drives. The average latency and seek time doesn't compare to a drive with equal capacity/cache. I suggest Seagate or WD.

I've have 10 Seagate hard drives, collected over a period of 8 years and ranging from 20GB to 1TB, I've never had a any problem with them.
They might not be as fast as Raptors on paper, but they have their moments.

Brianna · Mar 15, 2008, 06:42 PM // 18:42

Well, I have a Seagate and I like it, at first I didn't trust it, cause before this I always went with Western Digital drives which I trust a lot.

Great Hard Drive anyways.

Admael · Mar 15, 2008, 07:05 PM // 19:05

Seagate has a 5 year warranty, what's really not to trust? :P

WD only had a 2 year warranty just until recently.

Brianna · Mar 15, 2008, 07:24 PM // 19:24

I noticed though.. that when I formatted I could only make a 160gig portion out of the 320 gigs that the HDD has, and then when I get onto my desktop it only says I have 127 gigs available?

Admael · Mar 15, 2008, 07:35 PM // 19:35

The rest is probably unallocated space. You can use Partition Magic, or GParted (it's what I use), to fix/rearrange/merge separate blocks of unallocated space.

Snograt · Mar 15, 2008, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Meanwhile, back in the original saga, pt 2

Vista Ultimate 64bit installed, along with 8 gigs of whizzy. No problems identified so far - and my Windows Experience Index (or whutevar) is now 5.2 - not too shabby.

Admael · Mar 15, 2008, 10:12 PM // 22:12

With 4GB you're a shoe-in for 5.9 for memory

Snograt · Mar 15, 2008, 11:02 PM // 23:02

So my 2+2+2+2GB gives me 5.2, but 2+0+2+0Gb would give me 5.9?

Care to elucidate?

Admael · Mar 15, 2008, 11:09 PM // 23:09

4GB is the bare minimum you need to hit 5.9, any combination (4x1GB or 2x2GB) will yield 5.9

If you're getting 5.2 on 8GB there's something wrong.

Snograt · Mar 16, 2008, 12:59 PM // 12:59

Beats me, Vista sees all 8 GB of it, and it's 4 identical 2GB sticks of DDR2-800, CL4. Ballistix, if that makes any difference. With flashing red LEDs down the side to illuminate the inside of my non-modded case

Admael · Mar 17, 2008, 02:10 AM // 02:10

What a load of crap. Update the scores!

So your RAM score is 5.2, what is your computer score?

The Way Out · Mar 17, 2008, 01:18 PM // 13:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surena

HDDs suffer from very bad access times not transfer speed and while Raptors might seem nice, they lose (epicly) against SSDs which hopefully see more and more land. I would get a Raptor only for its access speed, not for anything else.

Saying that anything else below 10k RPM is painful is pretty epic fail.

This is why I work in IT and you don't....

I am sorry you are a gamer...

Again, anything below 10k (especially at the prices they are now) is painful. You get severe bottle necking (and a boatload of system performance on a 10k drive). Also, 10k doesn't refer to transfer speeds... it refers to how fast the platters spin (which translate to read and write times being faster)....

When you point the finger.... you know the rest! TY for the epic failure!!! Good to know I know nothing about anything.

Surena · Mar 17, 2008, 02:17 PM // 14:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Way Out

This is why I work in IT and you don't....

I am sorry you are a gamer...

Again, anything below 10k (especially at the prices they are now) is painful. You get severe bottle necking (and a boatload of system performance on a 10k drive). Also, 10k doesn't refer to transfer speeds... it refers to how fast the platters spin (which translate to read and write times being faster)....

When you point the finger.... you know the rest! TY for the epic failure!!! Good to know I know nothing about anything.

Good to know that we are on a gaming board and advising people on how to build their gaming machines and not their enterprise file/storage servers.

Epic indeed! Talk to me when you're not first level support anymore.

The Way Out · Mar 17, 2008, 03:26 PM // 15:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surena

Good to know that we are on a gaming board and advising people on how to build their gaming machines and not their enterprise file/storage servers.

Epic indeed! Talk to me when you're not first level support anymore.

Hmm... 15k drives for enterprise file/storage servers (not 10k... and you sound a bit angry, bro)...

10k drives for gaming (is that how you bold to emphasize?) rigs...

I am a gamer, and have been so for quite some time...

7,200k drives are average drives that you get in any system right now. They are not gaming drives. 10k drives are more common in true gaming rigs (which amazes me that you wouldn't know that).

Advice is to keep your agenda out of things and stop trolling for attention. I am now going to be factual from now on.

The first level support comment was funny... as was your lack of knowledge on the benefits a gamer gets from a faster rpm HD...

When you are helpful... then come talk to me...

When you speak from an emotional standpoint only... you sound like an ass.

Numa Pompilius · Mar 17, 2008, 03:39 PM // 15:39

What are you guys talking about? What's HD speed got to do with running GW under Vista? Is it about the swapfile?

You do NOT want to turn off the swap file with any modern operating system, be it Linux, OSX or Vista. Doing so will not improve performance, you're just wasting RAM and setting yourself up for system instability.

Any reasonably modern HD will run Vista just fine. Leave the swap file alone.

Brianna · Mar 17, 2008, 04:00 PM // 16:00

I just thought that since vista is a more ''Modern'' operating system that it could use the benefits of newer faster hardware, and I heard Raptors are pretty fast.

The Way Out · Mar 17, 2008, 04:11 PM // 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

I just thought that since vista is a more ''Modern'' operating system that it could use the benefits of newer faster hardware, and I heard Raptors are pretty fast.

Yes, in terms of speed, your system will have much faster loading times with faster HDs. Raptors rock, and I say that from owning multiple Raptors. Yes, you will get by with average drives, however, if you have the money for it, I would seriously suggest buying faster hard drives. You only gain from them.

Admael · Mar 17, 2008, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Raptors are fast, yes, but they're not for everyone. I think Raptor/Raid 0 is the only way Vista will give you a 5.9 in "disk transfer rate".

I've gotten complaints about them running hot and making too much noise, but I have neither of those problems.