Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › Is that normal for a HDD becomes much slower after using for like 5 years and almost full?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is that normal for a HDD becomes much slower after using for like 5 years and almost full?

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 
My HDD is WD5000AADS-00S9B0 and here is my crystaldiskmark result:

CrystalDiskMark 3.0.2 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 68.320 MB/s
Sequential Write : 71.570 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 25.596 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 41.325 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 0.315 MB/s [ 76.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 0.806 MB/s [ 196.7 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 0.474 MB/s [ 115.7 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 0.829 MB/s [ 202.5 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 97.0% (94.7/97.7 GB)] (x3)
Date : 2013/09/05 21:04:03
OS : Windows XP Professional SP3 [5.1 Build 2600] (x86)

Here is a result I found online:

WD5000AADS-00S9B0 Test Size[ MB ] 50 100 500 1000
Sequential Read[MB/s] 118.102 105.460 101.136 97.751
Sequential Write[MB/s] 88.440 89.571 98.319 96.129
Random Read 512KB[MB/s] 36.725 28.002 24.054 23.313
Random Write 512KB[MB/s] 116.680 88.101 69.509 63.999
Random Read 4KB[MB/s] 0.990 0.692 0.540 0.501
Random Write 4KB[MB/s] 2.097 1.821 1.466 1.411

I remember my result in few years ago was around 95 MB/s for sequential Read/Write. So is that because it has been years or because the HDD is almost full?
post #2 of 8
If the free space you're testing against is further into the inner diameter of the platters, you'll see less performance.

Try using something like HD Tune.

But yes, full drives that are likely fragmented will also feel slower as you populate data moving toward the inner edge of the platter/s.
post #3 of 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdgann View Post

I remember my result in few years ago was around 95 MB/s for sequential Read/Write. So is that because it has been years or because the HDD is almost full?

Since you have your drive partitioned, you're actually still writing to the faster portion of the drive (albeit not as fast as the outermost parts of the platter). I'm guessing fragmentation plays a part with your lower scores. Besides, isn't that drive part of the very first Caviar Green line? I believe those models go down to 40MB/s sequential so if you've got the other partition filled, too, I reckon you're better off than folks who don't partition.
Garnet
(11 items)
 
Lucifiel
(13 items)
 
Metatron
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3450S Intel DQ77KB Corsair 16GB DDR3 1600 SO-DIMM Samsung 830 256GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 256 mSATA Samsung 840 500GB Intel BXHTS1155LP Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
KeyboardCaseMouse
Logitech K800 Lian Li PC-Q05B Logitech M570 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Gigabyte GA-H55N-USB3 EVGA GTX 460 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Silverstone ST45SF 450W Silverstone Sugo SG05B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Biostar TH55B HD MSI GT 240 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x2GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel X25-M 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x86 Samsung 22" Antec EA-380D 
Case
Rosewill R101-P-BK 
  hide details  
Reply
Garnet
(11 items)
 
Lucifiel
(13 items)
 
Metatron
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3450S Intel DQ77KB Corsair 16GB DDR3 1600 SO-DIMM Samsung 830 256GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 256 mSATA Samsung 840 500GB Intel BXHTS1155LP Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
KeyboardCaseMouse
Logitech K800 Lian Li PC-Q05B Logitech M570 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Gigabyte GA-H55N-USB3 EVGA GTX 460 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Silverstone ST45SF 450W Silverstone Sugo SG05B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Biostar TH55B HD MSI GT 240 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x2GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel X25-M 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x86 Samsung 22" Antec EA-380D 
Case
Rosewill R101-P-BK 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 8
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rui-no-onna View Post

Since you have your drive partitioned, you're actually still writing to the faster portion of the drive (albeit not as fast as the outermost parts of the platter). I'm guessing fragmentation plays a part with your lower scores. Besides, isn't that drive part of the very first Caviar Green line? I believe those models go down to 40MB/s sequential so if you've got the other partition filled, too, I reckon you're better off than folks who don't partition.

yes, this hdd has drives, drive with windows has 2.92gb left while another drive has 11.5gb left.
post #5 of 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdgann View Post

yes, this hdd has drives, drive with windows has 2.92gb left while another drive has 11.5gb left.

In that case, if you hadn't partitioned, you'd probably be getting 40-55MB/s by now so all in all, you're not doing too badly given the age of your drive and the fact that it only runs at 5400RPM.
Garnet
(11 items)
 
Lucifiel
(13 items)
 
Metatron
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3450S Intel DQ77KB Corsair 16GB DDR3 1600 SO-DIMM Samsung 830 256GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 256 mSATA Samsung 840 500GB Intel BXHTS1155LP Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
KeyboardCaseMouse
Logitech K800 Lian Li PC-Q05B Logitech M570 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Gigabyte GA-H55N-USB3 EVGA GTX 460 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Silverstone ST45SF 450W Silverstone Sugo SG05B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Biostar TH55B HD MSI GT 240 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x2GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel X25-M 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x86 Samsung 22" Antec EA-380D 
Case
Rosewill R101-P-BK 
  hide details  
Reply
Garnet
(11 items)
 
Lucifiel
(13 items)
 
Metatron
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3450S Intel DQ77KB Corsair 16GB DDR3 1600 SO-DIMM Samsung 830 256GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial m4 256 mSATA Samsung 840 500GB Intel BXHTS1155LP Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
KeyboardCaseMouse
Logitech K800 Lian Li PC-Q05B Logitech M570 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Gigabyte GA-H55N-USB3 EVGA GTX 460 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Silverstone ST45SF 450W Silverstone Sugo SG05B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7-860 Biostar TH55B HD MSI GT 240 1GB GDDR5 Kingston 2x2GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Intel X25-M 120GB Windows 7 Ultimate x86 Samsung 22" Antec EA-380D 
Case
Rosewill R101-P-BK 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 8
Assuming it's been long (or never) since you've reformatted the drive, then yes, I'd say it's completely normal. There are so many factors; many of which have been mentioned here.
Honestly, I think you're doing pretty decently considering you're on a long running copy of XP. A reformat and copy of Windows 7 would do you wonders, though.
Trash Box
(14 items)
 
 
G73JH-A1
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 965BE 125W Asus M4A77D Asus 5770 Cucore 4GB Kingston 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSKeyboard
2x750GB Seagates 22x LG DVD-RW w7 Ultimate 64-bit  G15 
PowerCase
Antec Earthwatts 430W 80+ Antec New Solution NSK6580B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
720QM AsusTek Mobility HD5870 8GB Kingston 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB C300/500GB Seagate Bluray Combo w7 Ultimate 64-bit 17'' 1080P 
Case
G73JH-A1 
  hide details  
Reply
Trash Box
(14 items)
 
 
G73JH-A1
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD 965BE 125W Asus M4A77D Asus 5770 Cucore 4GB Kingston 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSKeyboard
2x750GB Seagates 22x LG DVD-RW w7 Ultimate 64-bit  G15 
PowerCase
Antec Earthwatts 430W 80+ Antec New Solution NSK6580B 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
720QM AsusTek Mobility HD5870 8GB Kingston 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB C300/500GB Seagate Bluray Combo w7 Ultimate 64-bit 17'' 1080P 
Case
G73JH-A1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 8
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rui-no-onna View Post

In that case, if you hadn't partitioned, you'd probably be getting 40-55MB/s by now so all in all, you're not doing too badly given the age of your drive and the fact that it only runs at 5400RPM.

I have two partitions for this harddisk, C: and D:.
post #8 of 8
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rui-no-onna View Post

In that case, if you hadn't partitioned, you'd probably be getting 40-55MB/s by now so all in all, you're not doing too badly given the age of your drive and the fact that it only runs at 5400RPM.

You mean defrag? I have used smart defrag and do defrag around once per month.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hard Drives & Storage
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › Is that normal for a HDD becomes much slower after using for like 5 years and almost full?