Articles: Storage

Bookmark and Share

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 ]

Performance in FC-Test

For this test two 32GB partitions are created on the drive and formatted in NTFS and then in FAT32. A file-set is then created, read from the drive, copied within the same partition and copied into another partition. The time taken to perform these operations is measured and the speed of the drive is calculated. The Windows and Programs file-sets consist of a large number of small files whereas the other three patterns (ISO, MP3, and Install) include a few large files each.

We’d like to note that the copying test is indicative of the drive’s behavior under complex load. In fact, the drive is working with two threads (one for reading and one for writing) when copying files.

You should be aware that the copying test not only indicates the speed of copying within the same HDD but is also indicative of the latter’s behavior under complex load. In fact, the HDD is processing two data threads then, one for reading and another for writing.

This test produces too much data, so we will only discuss the results achieved in NTFS. You can use the following link to view the FAT32 results.

Alas, the problems with the controller spoil the results. The Seagate 15K.1 and 10K.1 seem to win here but they have the lowest write speed according to the previous tests.

The Hitachi C10K300 is beyond competition. Its high recording density makes it unrivalled with every file-set. As for the others, the Hitachi C10K147 feels better than its opponents when processing the small files of the Windows and Programs patterns. The Seagate 15K.1 only enjoys an advantage over the 10,000rpm drives (excepting the 300GB Hitachi) in the ISO pattern.

When copying within the same partition or from one partition to another, the Hitachi C10K300 is in the lead, like in the reading test. The Hitachi C10K147 and the Seagate 10K.2 feel good, too. The Fujitsu is for some reason slower than the same-density HDDs when processing large files. The Seagate 15K.1 and 10K.1 are even worse, though. Their copying speed is no higher than 12MBps irrespective of the file-set we use.

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 ]


Comments currently: 3
Discussion started: 12/15/09 01:54:29 PM
Latest comment: 12/11/15 03:28:54 PM

View comments

Add your Comment