Articles: Storage
 

Bookmark and Share

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

Performance in Intel IOMeter

Sequential Read & Write Patterns

IOMeter is sending a stream of read and write requests with a request queue depth of 4. The size of the requested data block is changed each minute, so that we could see the dependence of the drive’s sequential read/write speed on the size of the data block. This test is indicative of the maximum speed the drive can achieve.

The numeric data can be viewed in tables. We will be discussing graphs and diagrams.

It is all clear with the top speeds as we have seen the same standings in the previous test. It is more interesting to check out the performance of the HDDs on small data blocks before they reach their maximum. The Fujitsu is the first to accelerate to its full: it delivers its top speed on 2KB data blocks already, which is an excellent result. However, the new Hitachi delivers an even higher speed then, but it also has a higher top speed which it delivers from 4KB blocks onwards. By the way, the new Hitachi C10K300 looks very good against its predecessor. You can see a notable performance growth not only on small data blocks but throughout the entire test. When it comes to Seagate, the company’s 15K.1 and 10K.2 are comparable on small data blocks, being both superior to their predecessor. Unfortunately, the 15K.1 takes rather too long to reach its top speed, requiring 8KB blocks for that.

The writing results are roughly similar to those that we’ve seen at reading but the HDDs differ more on small data blocks. We can’t say that the Fujitsu is overall better then. The Seagate 15K.1 is a disappointment. Its speed is too low for its 15,000rpm till 8KB data blocks.

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

Discussion

Comments currently: 2
Discussion started: 12/15/09 01:54:29 PM
Latest comment: 02/01/10 12:13:38 AM

View comments

Add your Comment