tarna Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 ...but it wasn't SATA - or at least it wasn't connected to the SATA ports on my motherboard. That's probably because I didn't hook it up correctly way back when I built the computer. It seems to have made quite a performance difference. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> :D You probably had a IDE ( otherwise now known as PATA (parallel ATA as opposed to serial ATA )) drive. You had the one with a wide, grey ribbon cable. You had it hooked up right or it wouldn't have worked at all. SATA is much better so you noticed an immediate performance improvement. SATA 2 is supposed to be even better but since my motherboard wouldn't run at those speeds ( I don't think. Now I'm gonna have to check. ), I had to back my new drive's speed down to a SATA 1. Something that also might have been a factor is that I've been told that as a drive becomes full of junk, programs, et cet, performance suffers since your computer uses part of the hard drive as it's virtual memory. If your drive is packed full of stuff, it's virtual memory becomes less and less ( it has less of a 'scribble sheet' to keep track of it's computations ) and therefore bogs down. Ruminations... When a man has no Future, the Present passes too quickly to be assimilated and only the static Past has value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Wow, Tarna explained exactly what I did, but in much better terms. I'm going to appoint you as my technical representative for now on And yes, I was able to do the entire transfer in windows, without a boot disk. The only oddity was that I had to validate XP and Office once again due to the hardware change, but that didn't require any special codes or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarna Posted January 25, 2007 Share Posted January 25, 2007 Wow, Tarna explained exactly what I did, but in much better terms. I'm going to appoint you as my technical representative for now on <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Only because I have a POS internet rig and I fiddle with it more than you had too to keep it running . I am 'so' looking forward to replacing the last item ( motherboard et al ) and applying my own special blend of thermite and aerosoled propane to give it a decent burial. Been thinking that ammonium tri-iodide and a bullet might be fun. Tannerite is looking good too. I really hate this drag-ass motherboard and it's 256 Mb RAM limitations. The processor fan squeals at me on a regular basis. Puting it out of it's misery would only be a courtesy. Throwing it in the bottom of a public outhouse and defecating it myself would probably much more appropriate but not nearly as satisfying as sending it in the fast bus to Heaven. Ruminations... When a man has no Future, the Present passes too quickly to be assimilated and only the static Past has value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 It seems to have made quite a performance difference. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> One of the most impressive upgrades is always the harddrive: these guys improve at or beyond the Moore's Law curve, so a year makes a HUGE difference. The complexity for minimum component costs has increased at a rate of roughly a factor of two per year ... Certainly over the short term this rate can be expected to continue, if not to increase. Something that also might have been a factor is that I've been told that as a drive becomes full of junk, programs, et cet, performance suffers since your computer uses part of the hard drive as it's virtual memory. If your drive is packed full of stuff, it's virtual memory becomes less and less ( it has less of a 'scribble sheet' to keep track of it's computations ) and therefore bogs down. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I finally moved all my games off my C:\ drive, as I noticed that it had just over 1GB of free space (and I couldn't play Half-Life 2 after about thirty seconds due to a ferocious virtual memory thrash of the HD); even though it's all the same physical harddrive, the 10GB+ buffer should allow me to avoid this sort of inconvenience in the future. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metadigital Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Hitachi have just announced the 1TB drive: Deskstar 7K1000 (3 OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Anandtech has tested the new 1TB drive from Hitachi. I think this quote sums it up pretty well: "Overall, we think Hitachi's Deskstar 7K1000 is the best 7200rpm drive we have tested to date." Source: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2949&p=1 This (together with the fact that Hitachi constantly wins hardware tests in most Swedish publications too) is the reason why I only buy Hitachi. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 *twitch twitch* I want one... HELL! I WANT 4! *twitch twitch* Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyCrimson Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 I need one of those now, because lately I've been saving in tif's, and my relatively small HD is disappearing rapidly. :D “Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Anandtech has tested the new 1TB drive from Hitachi. I think this quote sums it up pretty well: "Overall, we think Hitachi's Deskstar 7K1000 is the best 7200rpm drive we have tested to date." Source: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2949&p=1 This (together with the fact that Hitachi constantly wins hardware tests in most Swedish publications too) is the reason why I only buy Hitachi. It beat the 10k 150GB Raptor in most of those tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Anandtech has tested the new 1TB drive from Hitachi. I think this quote sums it up pretty well: "Overall, we think Hitachi's Deskstar 7K1000 is the best 7200rpm drive we have tested to date." Source: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2949&p=1 This (together with the fact that Hitachi constantly wins hardware tests in most Swedish publications too) is the reason why I only buy Hitachi. It beat the 10k 150GB Raptor in most of those tests. No it didn't. Especially the ones where HD performance truly matters most of them went to the Raptor. It did, however, come close enough that the loss in performance is somewhat negligible and it makes up for it with being very quiet and having 7 times the storage capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 No it didn't. Especially the ones where HD performance truly matters most of them went to the Raptor. It did, however, come close enough that the loss in performance is somewhat negligible and it makes up for it with being very quiet and having 7 times the storage capacity. I think I must have misread most of those graphs. I could have sworn the Hitachi was getting better results when I read it earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bokishi Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 LOL I need two of those in Raid 0 Current 3DMark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 (edited) LOL I need two of those in Raid 0 2TB of storage. I really wish I could afford that. Edited March 22, 2007 by Deraldin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 LOL I need two of those in Raid 0 2TB of storage. I really wish I could afford that. In one year you will be able to afford it. You just have to remember that this is Hitachi's 200GB platter version! They have the capability to do 250GB platters already and even bigger platters are on their way, so a year from now we'll probably be seeing 2TB drives in the stores. By then these babies will be affordable. Just like 500GB drives are now! Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidesco Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Does this mean 200GB drives will soon be available for, like, 20 bucks? "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 No, it probably just means that 200GB drives will be obsolete soon, as noone will buy less than 400GB drives. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidesco Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 But they'll have to do something with the smaller drives that are already for sale. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 But they'll have to do something with the smaller drives that are already for sale. Stock will be sold off and the new, larger drives will be phased in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyCrimson Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Y'know....I still have no idea how to make XP recognize my entire HD. It stops at around 127GB, but there's 60 more (or something, I forget by now) on there it doesn't "see." Huuby said XP should see it, but he's no XP expert so has no idea why it's not. Anyone know? I'm sure it's something absurdly simple... “Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorth Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Does your controller recognise more than 127Gb? It might not be Windows that is the problem... That I should ever utter those words! “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyCrimson Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Yeah, it does. I just put in a big 2nd drive and it's fine. I don't know what it is - maybe the disc-maker lied on the box about how much there was. More likely I forgot/don't know some config. thing upon installing it; hubby doesn't forget that stuff. “Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarna Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Yeah, it does. I just put in a big 2nd drive and it's fine.I don't know what it is - maybe the disc-maker lied on the box about how much there was. More likely I forgot/don't know some config. thing upon installing it; hubby doesn't forget that stuff. If I remember correctly Lady, you have an older motherboard. Depending on it's age, it's BIOS will not recognize the larger drives but once WinXP kicks in, any secondary drive will be recognized and controlled by XP. Your primary drive is controlled however by your motherboard's BIOS. If that is the case, you can possibly 'flash' the BIOS of your board to something more modern if possible but that probably isn't worth the risk as a failed flash will permanently destroy your motherboard. Safer to upgrade when convenient. My old P3 wouldn't recognize anything past 137 Gb but would easily accept a 320 as a secondary drive. My newer computer will accept a 300 Gb ( at least ) as primary. Ruminations... When a man has no Future, the Present passes too quickly to be assimilated and only the static Past has value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyCrimson Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Hmm, very interesting, thanks. Hubby was fairly sure it should've seen the primary but I didn't ask him why. He has a computer with the same motherboard as mine so if he has it working on his (I don't know for sure, I'd have to ask) it oughta work on mine. I can see where a limitation like that might arise tho. And yes, my mo'bo is ancient in computer terms, if not in years. Darn tech. “Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarna Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Since my wording could be poor, I thought I'd add a link from those that actually have a clue... http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/bios/sizeGB128-c.html This could apply to what you are experiencing. Ruminations... When a man has no Future, the Present passes too quickly to be assimilated and only the static Past has value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now