PCBUILD Archives

Personal Computer Hardware discussion List

PCBUILD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Peter Shkabara <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCBUILD - Personal Computer Hardware discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 25 Jul 2003 08:37:20 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
In running such tests you have to be careful that the cache is not messing
with your transfer speed. It is possible that the information is still in
cache and skews your results. There may be other reasons to explain the
situation, but I just though to mention the cache possibility.

It is probably best to use drive speed test software that takes into account
effects of a cache. For example, Fresh Diagnose from www.freshdevices.com is
freeware that includes drive speed testing for read and write. SiSoft Sandra
is another free testing utility you could try.

Peter
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - http://gocolumbia.org/pesh


> -----Original Message-----
> I've never tried a speed test, but just did - the results 
> were unexpected.
> 
> I used a 41mb folder for the trial.  The first transfer was 
> from the host XP Pro NTFS drive, a 20gb WD 7200rpm, to the 
> USB 2.0 box holding a 40gb 7200 Maxtor formatted in FAT32.
> 
> Test1 - host to satellite - 25 seconds
> Test2 - satellite to host - 4 seconds
> 
> I have no idea why the disparity - anyone have a clue?  I did 
> the test twice with virtually identical results.
> 
> Ian Porter

              The NOSPIN Group is now offering Free PC Tech
                     support at our newest website:
                          http://freepctech.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2