File Transfer Test
2GB of Music Files
Time in Seconds (s)
Shorter bars are better
HDTach Results
Bandwidth in Megabytes per Second (MB/s)
Longer bars are better
CrystalDiskMark Results
Bandwidth in Megabytes per Second (MB/s)
Longer bars are better
COMMENTS
@Reg: Tested on 2009-12-16?
If your machine's date is right, you've been sitting on this test for exactly 4 weeks before releasing it?
Request from the vendor?
Care to explain?
Years
"it'll be years before high capacity spinning drives will be able to take advantage of SATA 3.0, RAID or not"
Not really, the next doubling of density of the disk surface should push us into SATA3.0 realms.
@Ivon
"How did you fit a i7 940 chip LGA1366 on a P55A motherboard LGA1156."
It's simple. You buy the LGA1156 version of the i7 940 chip.
Ivon the Terrible
How did you fit a i7 940 chip LGA1366 on a P55A motherboard LGA1156. Heavy use of the scissors?
No advantage for a RAID
"""Sticking 4 of these in a RAID array could make for some impressive speed increases."""
Actually, you're looking at either A) The exact speed increase for using the same number of drives with SATA 2.0 or B) Going to saturate your controller. Drives don't share the 3 or 6 gbit speed, they each get that much bandwidth, so as long as your drives don't saturate SATA 2.0 (Which we can see that they do not,) you'll get no speed boost from 3.0. As an example, my 5 drive software raid 5, running on my (crappy) nvidia onboard SATA 2.0 ports can easily do sequential read and write at above 300MB/s, and that's with 2 year old drives.
So to sum up: it'll be years before high capacity spinning drives will be able to take advantage of SATA 3.0, RAID or not.
