The Logic Off Topic list

Message posted by Graf Zahl <p-r-s@...>:

hi!

ok, i've ordered my new mac pro and now i need 4 new hd's
i've figured ou 2 different combinations with 2 different hd's:

either 2x250gb (system&record) + 2x500gb (smaples&libraries)
or all 4x500gb

here are the models:

250GB = Seagate ST3250410AS
data transfer read/write 104mb/s	
access write 10ms / read 8.5ms

500GB = Samsung HD501LJ
data transfer read/write 64mb/s	 
access write 14ms / read 7ms

now i'm asking me if the 500gb samsung isn't fast enough?
on one site can't have enough disc space today, but on the other site you
can't ignore the speed.......

and what info is more decisive and for what?
the data transfer (which is much more on the seagate) for recording and
system, and the access time (which i thing is not so dramatically different)
for the libraries and sample for th exs f.e.?
or vice versa?
or entirely different?

i'm very confused and uncertain, but i have to order tomorrow cause
otherwise i'm sitting here with no working system.....

thx alot and best regards

peter

p.s. has anyone experiences with the actual 24" mointors from
dell,samsung,lg,iilyama?

Hi,

Don't know if this answers your questions, but here's what Sascha  
Franck wrote on the subject back in September (the tests mentioned  
here were performed by a German magazine):

<<In their SATA comparison, two Seagate Barracudas with 250GB capacity  
made it
to the first two places (I actually don't even know the differences  
between
the two, the one ranking first has the model number ST3250410AS). They  
seem
to be truly quiet as well.
Their IDE drives are ranking quite high, too.

Fwiw, this test seemed to reveal that larger drives (anything larger  
than
250GB) wouldn't be that fast anymore, the transfer rate numbers are  
really
going down for anything larger (the only real exception was again a  
Seagate
Barracuda 750GB, but that one is IDE).

Now, I am not sure how well all these tests relate to real world  
useage, I
also don't know whether the results would be identical on Macs (they  
tested
on PCs), but to me it seems that if you want truly fast drives, SATA  
ones
with up to 250GB storage space are the way to go.>>

Based on this I for one would get at least 1 250 GB drive for  
recording...

HTH,

Andy

On Jan 19, 2008, at 11:55 PM, Graf Zahl wrote:
>
> hi!
>
> ok, i've ordered my new mac pro and now i need 4 new hd's
> i've figured ou 2 different combinations with 2 different hd's:
>
> either 2x250gb (system&record) + 2x500gb (smaples&libraries)
> or all 4x500gb
>
> here are the models:
>
> 250GB = Seagate ST3250410AS
> data transfer read/write 104mb/s	
> access write 10ms / read 8.5ms
>
> 500GB = Samsung HD501LJ
> data transfer read/write 64mb/s	
> access write 14ms / read 7ms
>
> now i'm asking me if the 500gb samsung isn't fast enough?
> on one site can't have enough disc space today, but on the other  
> site you
> can't ignore the speed.......
>
> and what info is more decisive and for what?
> the data transfer (which is much more on the seagate) for recording  
> and
> system, and the access time (which i thing is not so dramatically  
> different)
> for the libraries and sample for th exs f.e.?
> or vice versa?
> or entirely different?
>
> i'm very confused and uncertain, but i have to order tomorrow cause
> otherwise i'm sitting here with no working system.....
>
> thx alot and best regards
>
> peter
>
> p.s. has anyone experiences with the actual 24" mointors from
> dell,samsung,lg,iilyama?

I wrote:

> Based on this I for one would get at least 1 250 GB drive for  
> recording...

...And to clarify it a little further I'd get as many small drives as I needed exclusively for 
recording and use larger drives for the OS, samples and libraries. Just MHO.

Best,

Andy

Message posted by Graf Zahl <p-r-s@...>:

hi and thx for assisting me ;-)


"digitalmechanics" <andyhardwake@...> wrote:

> Based on this I for one would get at least 1 250 GB drive for  
> recording...

>...And to clarify it a little further I'd get as many small drives as I needed exclusively for 
>recording and use larger drives for the OS, samples and libraries.


when u take a look at the transfer rate of these two hd's you'll see very clear what you said in your first posting.
the smaller seagate has almost the double rate!!!
that's why i'm so unsure which one i should buy.
the difference of the access time isn't so much that i think this doesn't matter really.

but when is the almost double transfer rate of the seagate noticeable?

it my current mac pro i've got 2 500gb western digital (WD5000KS) where are the libraries, samples and the apple loops are
this one has similar access times and a transfer rate of 60mb/s, so overall they are very similar to the samsung
but when i open the loop browser, it always interrupt the very smooth working/speed flow cause i have to wait about 10 seconds till the loop browser is ready and this is very very annoying!!!!

so, would be this issue gone with the double transfer rate of the seagate??????

On Jan 20, 2008, at 1:55 AM, Graf Zahl wrote:

> Message posted by Graf Zahl <p-r-s@...>:
>
> hi!
>
> ok, i've ordered my new mac pro and now i need 4 new hd's
> i've figured ou 2 different combinations with 2 different hd's:
>
> either 2x250gb (system&record) + 2x500gb (smaples&libraries)
> or all 4x500gb
>
> here are the models:
>
> 250GB = Seagate ST3250410AS
> data transfer read/write 104mb/s	
> access write 10ms / read 8.5ms
>
> 500GB = Samsung HD501LJ
> data transfer read/write 64mb/s	
> access write 14ms / read 7ms
>
> now i'm asking me if the 500gb samsung isn't fast enough?
> on one site can't have enough disc space today, but on the other  
> site you
> can't ignore the speed.......
>
> and what info is more decisive and for what?
> the data transfer (which is much more on the seagate) for recording  
> and
> system, and the access time (which i thing is not so dramatically  
> different)
> for the libraries and sample for th exs f.e.?
> or vice versa?
> or entirely different?
>
> i'm very confused and uncertain, but i have to order tomorrow cause
> otherwise i'm sitting here with no working system.....
>
> thx alot and best regards
>
> peter
>
> p.s. has anyone experiences with the actual 24" mointors from
> dell,samsung,lg,iilyama?


Take a hard look at the MTBFs on the drives. Size matters less when  
they fail more often! We buy hundreds of drives a year in my (real)  
business and have started to shy away from larger drives because of  
failure rates. This is especially true for the 1TB RAID configurations  
you can get in single boxes. They are VERY sensitive to heat.

Brian

Don't know the exact answer, but here I have a 250 GB Seagate for  
recording and 3 750 GB Seagate drives, 2 of which are used as a  
software RAID for samples/libraries and the third one serves as a  
bootup drive. All I can say, this is the best setup I could achieve in  
1 and a half months of constantly tweaking my machine.

Best,

Andy

On Jan 20, 2008, at 6:30 AM, Graf Zahl wrote:
>
> when u take a look at the transfer rate of these two hd's you'll see  
> very clear what you said in your first posting.
> the smaller seagate has almost the double rate!!!
> that's why i'm so unsure which one i should buy.
> the difference of the access time isn't so much that i think this  
> doesn't matter really.
>
> but when is the almost double transfer rate of the seagate noticeable?
>
> it my current mac pro i've got 2 500gb western digital (WD5000KS)  
> where are the libraries, samples and the apple loops are
> this one has similar access times and a transfer rate of 60mb/s, so  
> overall they are very similar to the samsung
> but when i open the loop browser, it always interrupt the very  
> smooth working/speed flow cause i have to wait about 10 seconds till  
> the loop browser is ready and this is very very annoying!!!!
>
> so, would be this issue gone with the double transfer rate of the  
> seagate??????

Message posted by Graf Zahl <p-r-s@...>:

ok, now i hope i've got it:

system = 250gb seagte
record = 250gb seagate
libraries = 2x500gb samsung softraid 0

backup solution:

one enclosure with 2xWD7500AAKS in raid 0 and 2 partitions.
one for a system clone 1:1 and the other one for the hole stuff from the other 3 drives

any doubts?

plz not ;-)

One issue with running many drives is that it can overtax your power 
supply. At idle, a drive may only draw about 8 or 10 watts but on spinup
the current drawn can be up 2.5x the rate when at operating speed. 4 
drives can be a problem even with a 500 W power supply. An Antec 
Neopower 480 I have will not drive 4 Seagate Barracudas for example (on 
PC). There is a case therefore for keeping the drive count down. Two x 
250 isn't necessarily a better idea than 1 x 500 or 1x 1000.

> Message posted by Graf Zahl <p-r-s@...>:
> 
> ok, now i hope i've got it:
> 
> system = 250gb seagte

I'd put a large one here...

> one enclosure with 2xWD7500AAKS in raid 0 and 2 partitions.

RAID on external backup drives? Isn't worth the hassles AFAIU... And why would you need partitions? Just install OS and use separate folders for backup sets... Just MMHO...

Best,

Andy

"Murray McDowall" <murraymc@...> wrote:

> One issue with running many drives is that it can overtax your power 
> supply. At idle, a drive may only draw about 8 or 10 watts but on spinup
> the current drawn can be up 2.5x the rate when at operating speed. 4 
> drives can be a problem even with a 500 W power supply. An Antec 
> Neopower 480 I have will not drive 4 Seagate Barracudas for example (on 
> PC). There is a case therefore for keeping the drive count down. Two x 
> 250 isn't necessarily a better idea than 1 x 500 or 1x 1000.

I've been using 4 internal drives in both my G4 and my brand new Mac Pro and never seen any issues, maybe because Mac gives a drive some 5 or 6 seconds to spin up before it starts another one... Thanks for the headsup anyway.

Best,

Andy

Andy Hardwake wrote:
> 
> 
> "Murray McDowall" <murraymc@... 
> <mailto:murraymc%40melbpc.org.au>> wrote:
> 
>  > One issue with running many drives is that it can overtax your power
>  > supply. At idle, a drive may only draw about 8 or 10 watts but on spinup
>  > the current drawn can be up 2.5x the rate when at operating speed. 4
>  > drives can be a problem even with a 500 W power supply. An Antec
>  > Neopower 480 I have will not drive 4 Seagate Barracudas for example (on
>  > PC). There is a case therefore for keeping the drive count down. Two x
>  > 250 isn't necessarily a better idea than 1 x 500 or 1x 1000.
> 
> I've been using 4 internal drives in both my G4 and my brand new Mac Pro 
> and never seen any issues, maybe because Mac gives a drive some 5 or 6 
> seconds to spin up before it starts another one... Thanks for the 
> headsup anyway.

Yep - staggered startup for drives is the obvious fix for this issue but 
not all machines do it.