"AJ" wrote in message
...


AJ,
Here are my test results from PC Pitstop:
overall score 1442
Drive C
NTFS Partition Format
4 KB Cluster Size
No Label Drive Label
78152 Size
33820 Free Space
8% Data Fragmentation
3% File Fragmentation
Unknown last Defrag
161 MB junk Files
766.6 MB/s Cached speed
2.96 MB/s Uncached speed (seems slow to me???)

Bitsbucket

I would focus on why that uncached is so low. Both of you were half of
what Ed and I have. The XP backup that runs by default might be to
blame or something along that line. They say you should always name
your drive for best results. I name my using whatever size they are.
If the benchmark is right and XP programing resources running in the
background aren't to blame it's almost as if you're using a 40 wire
IDE cable instead of 80. Or a driver problem is to blame.Or having a
CD-Rom on that cable which does cause the cable to default to the
lowest speed of any drives on it.
------------
When your PC gives a little they give a lot.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/disco

I don't buy it, I just ran the bench, using ntfs on a ide pata raid stripe,
my box is optimized to say the least(for it's age)!
Free Resources 90%

Cached speed 557.91 MB/s 584.91 MB/s
Uncached speed 3.43 MB/s (148%) 6.23 MB/s (269%)



SiSoft, and others disagree about uncached transfers, I think there's
flaw with respect to system partitions and ntfs and pcpitstop!
How come I can transfer several gigs at 23MB/s to and from the stripe?
And that's to a slower drive.