HDD response times

[sorcerer]

Got an HP Compaq DX2420 desktop machine in that was originally running Vista but was upgraded a while ago (not by me) to Windows 7 Home Premium 32-bit. It's got 2GB RAM and a Pentium Dual Core E5200 @ 2.5GHz and is running, according to the customer, "slower than normal".

It had one or two viruses/malware but is now clean. It's not overheating, RAM test shows no errors after an 11-hour run with Memtest86+ v5, and both GSmartControl and WD Data Lifeguard diagnostics report no errors after running extended tests on the HDD.

Rightly or wrongly I've tended to discount the HDD as the problem if GSmartControl and/or the manufacturer's diagnostics come up clean but a recent mention of response times somewhere made me think I should also look into that. I ran both HDD Scan and the trial version of HDD Tune, the results of which can be seen here, here and here. The problem is, as I've not really used either program before I don't really know what I'm looking at or how to interpret the results, so could some kind soul please advise if the HDD is in fact good or if you would be replacing it? Thanks.

 

[FremontPC]

Sorcerer -

Let's see the SMART report (not the long or short SMART test) results. That benchmark looks a bit funky to me. You should find it on the Health tab as I recall.

 

[altrenda]

I always ask my clients to define "Slow". Is it application slow or Internet slow?

Is it slower opening Word or an Excel spreadsheet than it used to? The HD is suspect, as well as the age of the Windows installation. Does creating a new user make a difference?

If it is slow opening web pages, that's a different animal. The modern web is much more resource intensive than even a few years ago, with pages having more elements and things to load. This is a dual core machine with only 2gb ram, most likely sharing it with the gpu. Match that with a degrading HD, and swapping like crazy, it would not be surprising if it feels slow.

 

[sorcerer]

Sorcerer -

Let's see the SMART report (not the long or short SMART test) results. That benchmark looks a bit funky to me. You should find it on the Health tab as I recall.

Thanks for your reply - the SMART report is here. Interestingly, neither of the other two flag the airflow temp as a problem.

 

[sorcerer]

I always ask my clients to define "Slow". Is it application slow or Internet slow?

Is it slower opening Word or an Excel spreadsheet than it used to? The HD is suspect, as well as the age of the Windows installation. Does creating a new user make a difference?

I've not yet tried creating a new user but will do and see what happens. It's "application slow" as opposed to "internet slow". Thanks for your reply altrenda, much appreciated.

 

[FremontPC]

You could try cross checking it with Crystal Disk Info. If the drive is over half full, then you could end up using the more questionable part of the drive. You might check to see if Intel Rapid Storage is installed, I've had that give really odd results on some systems. Other than that, take a look with Process Explorer to see what's doing all the disk I/O. Not sure you're going to win on this one, might want to see if you can sell the customer on a SSD ftw.

 

[sorcerer]

Thanks Fremont - already checked with Crystal Disk Info and that doesn't flag air temp or any other attribute as problematic. Will have a look at Process Explorer but given what you say, along with altrenda saying that the drive is suspect and the age and spec of the machine, there may be an upsell opportunity here.

THank you for your help guys.

 

[FremontPC]

Yeah, an old WD Blue. Def not a speed demon to begin with and while it looks like the access times are ok, the throughput tells another story. Like I said, check for Intel Rapid Storage and maybe try swapping out the SATA cable, but an SSD is likely to be a very satisfying upgrade for the customer.

 

[sorcerer]

I'm just about to crack open a beer and settle down to watch a bit of TV with the wife so I probably won't be on here again tonight but I wonder if I can ask you a favour? Just so that I can learn from this and hopefully be a bit more confident next time, what is it about the results that give you concern? You mention throughput above but what is an acceptable (and conversely, unacceptable) figure? Is there anything else that you can see? Thanks again

 

[FremontPC]

I'm mainly looking at the pattern. I like to see a nice, smooth curve without a lot of dropouts. Google HDTune benchmark, click on "images" and have a look at some of the graphs there. When I see big dropouts like your drive is showing, especially when it doesn't recover quickly, it indicates the disk isn't going to keep up with the demand and the CPU is going to be underutilized. While that model of drive isn't going to be a top performer, if you could get a smoother curve from say 80 to 50 MB/S, then it would have some chance of standing up to the demands of Windows and the web. Other drives, like a WD Black 1T with a larger cache will show you much higher overall numbers and more reliable throughput.

 

[Larry Sabo]

Here's an HDDScan comparison of speed before and after I swapped heads (well, removed then re-installed, hence RnR): http://prntscr.com/6vsuuy. This is a laptop drive, but serves the purpose for illustration.

The scan you posted says S S S L L L O O O W W W to me, even though there are no reallocated sectors/events. I'd clone the drive and repeat the scan then compare the scan to the original. You'll see the difference, I'm sure.

 

[sorcerer]

Thanks Fremont and Larry, that's brilliant