HDD performance comparisson

[billybellfoot]

hi

i have two HDD one is 160GB (O/S drive) the other 500GB (spare) i was thinking of swapping out the 160GB currently my os drive for the 500GB for extra storage however would like to know if the performance would be better or worse than whats currently installed
as i would like the extra storage but not at the cost of performance.

i have included screens for comparisson.



thanks for any help/info provided

 

[wither 3]

Personally, I would use the WD disk for all my operations because it has the highest Access times and transfer rates. On the other hand, the other disk has limited storage space.

However, in using the WD disk for all operations and the other disk for storing files, the bottleneck is going to be the other disc because its transfer rates are woefully low compared to the WD disk.

If you don't have a huge need for storage, I would partition and use the WD disk for everything and use the other disc for compressed backups, if the space is large enough.

I know someone else is going to have the reverse position so we'll let it fly.

 

[billybellfoot]

hi thanks for the response.

that was my intention to use the wd for my os drive and partition for storage of media etc. and just keep the smaller hitachi drive as a spare

but wasnt sure how to read/compare the readings of hdtune. access time transfer rate etc is higher better or lower better etc etc

didnt want to go through the whole process to find id swapped to a slower performance.

as at the moment im using the smaller hitachi internally with the larger wd connected externally but storage wise made sense to switch to the larger internal and smaller external if/when needed. but not at the expense/loss of performance of windows o/s for instance

so to clarify is the wd or the hitachi best/fastest performance wise

thanks

 

[LMiller7]

Are you certain that nothing else of significance was running while doing the tests? The relatively high CPU usage and rather erratic performance of the Hitachi drive tend to indicate that something was. If that was the case the tests mean little to nothing.

The access time will be of the greatest importance in general use and low numbers are better. For the other numbers (except cpu usage) higher is better. The average transfer rate will be the most important here.

 

[wither 3]

I was in error in using the word "highest" in regards to the Access times. I should have said lowest or fastest consistant with what LMiller7 said.

 

[billybellfoot]

hi thanks guys

i can repeat the test i dont think anything else was running


here are the new tests

really appreciate the help guys

thanks again

 

[Patonb]

I'm confused, is the WD Elements a usb drive?

 

[billybellfoot]

hi
yes paton the wd is in an external case connected via usb
as i only have one hdd bay on pc so only way i could do the side by side comparisson

thanks

 

[wither 3]

Doesn't change my opinion.

 

[LMiller7]

Is that USB 2 or USB 3? To achieve USB 3 speeds both the computer and enclosure interfaces would have to be USB 3. If it is USB 2 that would limit throughput to a maximum of about 35 MB/s and may well be less. In that case you are probably not measuring the drive performance at all but of the USB interface. The performance shown in HD Tune seems too flat, lacking the roll off that the Hitachi drive has. This is unusual for non USB conventional drives.

Do understand that Microsoft does not support installing an OS to an external drive (except Windows 8 Enterprise Edition).

 

[Patonb]

hi
yes paton the wd is in an external case connected via usb
as i only have one hdd bay on pc so only way i could do the side by side comparisson

thanks

Then your 2 tests are useless, and if your elments is like mine, its deemed a green type drive btw.

Green drives shut down to save power, meaning as an OS drive, it'll stutter while loading if you leave it a bit

Doesn't change my opinion.

How can you advise the WD when the tests are invalid due to the 2 drives in different setups. If you actually believ e that it's valid, then this statement under mines ALL the advice you've ever given pretty much.

Now the next thing is this is all irrelevant as it looks like the acer aspire revo uses a 2.5" drive and the WD is a 3.5" drive, so it won't fit.

 

[billybellfoot]

hi the wd is a 2.5 not 3.5. and is connected via usb 2.0

i wasnt intending to install os on an external drive via usb
i was intending to install the wd internally and then use as os drive
if indeed the performance was better than the currently instlled hitachi
as the hitachi is 160gb wd is 500gb it would be an improvement on storage
however didnt want to improve storage at the sacrifice of performance
so wanted to know if the wd would be of equal or better performance to the hitachi.
if it is/was of equal performance i was intending to fit it into my pc and use that as my os internally.
leaving me with the hitachi as an external (spare for back-up etc)

as i only have one bay the only way i can give info on the wd stats is via external caddy (usb 2.0)

thanks again to all for input and info

much appreciated

 

[Patonb]

The only way to tell for sure is to install the drive and try it.,

The 160Gig is a 5400 rpm drive, and I can't find what speed the WD is.

Try to find a porogram that'll tell you your drive model, then we might be able to help some more.

 

[billybellfoot]

hi the only info i can find is :WD Elements 10A2

sorry if that is no use.

its a portable 500gb external HDD 2.5"

thanks

 

[Patonb]

Odd, I can't even find it either.

 

[wither 3]

I can find a driver for it but not the actual drive. I think it's also known as the 1042.

I'm not sure how he's going to connect the WD drive internally. However, since the tests are done with it connected via the USB bottleneck and it's has a faster access time, I wouldn't think that it would be any slower as an internal drive via any type of connection.

 

[billybellfoot]

ok thanks guys for the help/info

if you think it will be at least equal performance wise i will pop it in and give it a go

thanks again

fingers crossed

 

[wither 3]

Since I'm an amateur, I can't guarantee anything.

 

[Patonb]

You'd be smart to put it in and boot off a linux livecds and test, that way youu don't have to in stall windows yet.