When the workload increased to 16 requests, the HDDs demonstrated their unique individuality. Maxtor Atlas 15K was ahead in case of low writes share, and Fujitsu MAS in case the writes share was really big (>=40%). Seagate HDD outperforms Fujitsu MAS in RandomRead mode and Maxtor Atlas in case of high writes percentage.
Also I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the performance of Fujitsu MAS appeared dependent on the controller type in RandomRead mode. It turned out evidently faster on U160 controller compared with the results on U320 controller.
When we increase the request queue depth, Seagate HDD manages to get ahead of the rivals. It is most likely to be connected with the fact that Cheetah 15K.3 features very deep TCQ buffer (Target Command Queuing), than Maxtor or Fujitsu.
However, the queue depth of 64 outgoing requests is very unlikely to occur on a real server, that is why the advantage of Seagate drive has purely theoretical interest for us.