cluberti Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 But in real life; does it increase harddisk performance?Yes, when it works it does, quite a bit. What happens is that the drive tells the OS driver that the write is completed once the entire file copy is either on disk or in cache, rather than ENTIRELY written to the disk - it will go back and flush the cache to the disk at a later point when it thinks the drive is idle and won't affect performance. This can drastically improve HDD utilization and performance, and make the system more responsive and hopefully faster. When it doesn't work, however, it can cause the system to be slower, so this was tested for in Win7's winsat because it does matter.In other words; why did they put in the write back cache when it is decreasing performance?What winsat is testing is the actual performance of the drive during load whilst write-back caching is enabled, and what the score is saying is that, in fact, the drive you have performs FAR better with write-back caching disabled. The reasons for this could simply be that the spindle(s) is/are too slow, or a poor hard disk controller on the system board, or the algorithm for write-back in the HDD firmware is not optimal, etc. A lot of times it's that the hard disk controller does a poor job of handling out-of-order flushes, or that it's actually slow to write (but not read) thus negating any benefit a write-back cache would give, etc. Note that this phenomenon is seen more often on laptop drives/chipsets and older desktop IDE/PATA drives rather than newer drives and chipsets, so keep that in mind.But, this is much more a "real world" test than Vista's was, so the number is more accurate with the write-back test - your drive really is performing that much better under a "real-world" test with the caching disabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XP_NO Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Thanks for your clear explanation Cluberti.I defenately will keep the write back cache disabled then So, then the performance of my laptop tested by the Win7 Performance Score: 4.5Memory is the issue here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluberti Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Also note that there is a very good blog post on the E7 blog about the WEI changes, and it does go into detail about the HDD test changes. A good read overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley89 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Thanks for the answer about the graphic card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Access Denied Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) The rating system is not working correct on Win 7New ComputerMy Quad Core at 2.5 and 8 GB Ram it gets a 2 on Win 7Old ComputerMy Single Core P4 at 2.5 and 2 GB Ram it gets a 3.4 Win 7My P4 3.0 with HT gets a 3.4 also. Edited January 28, 2009 by accessdenied042 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavveman Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 This is my stats. Pretty good actually. But I guess it will change when the sharp version of win7 comes out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbosdell Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 This is my stats. Pretty good actually. But I guess it will change when the sharp version of win7 comes out.My score is the same as yours except my CPU and ram get a 7.3. (Overclocked Q9300 to 3.2Ghz and running 8GB of ram )It's nice to finally have a 6 but I feel like for the money I spent on this system it should have been 7 average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kartel Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunsmokingman Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 I get a crap 3 on win7 and yet cavveman get an 6 with almost the same specs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Access Denied Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Put a Raptor in that pupppy, or better yet, RAID two (or four) of them on a 3ware card and you'll get a 7 on your hard disk, lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluberti Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 I get a crap 3 on win7 and yet cavveman get an 6 with almost the same specs.It's not just the size of the disk, it's the type of disk and the speed. Lots of people go from 3 to 5.x or even 6.x numbers when disabling write caching, so if you don't get that big a bump you just simply have a slow hard disk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayayess1190 Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Asus EEE 901Dell Inspiron 9100 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lippy Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 My primary system. Hard drive is a Samsung Spinpoint F1 1 TB. RAM is low because I only have 2 DIMMs installed atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_H001 Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 This is my home built PC which runs Vista great and I'm glad to see my HD is not the lowest score on W7 like it is on Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JatinBeniwal Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 all score exceeds 7 but my harddisks scores only 5.6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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