Articles: Storage

Bookmark and Share

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 ]

Performance in WinBench 99

We examined two situations with WinBench: 1) using the full capacity of the drive and 2) using 32GB of their capacity.

Regrettably, we suffered casualties in this test as we couldn’t get the numbers for the Maxtor 5A300J0 installed into the STLab case and attached via FireWire. The controller of this case must have been the reason for that.

  • Maxtor 5A300J0 (Graph);
  • Maxtor 5A300J0 + STLab/USB 2.0 (Graph);
  • Maxtor B14D300, FireWire (Graph);
  • Maxtor B14D300, USB 2.0 (Graph).

Let’s first examine the numbers we got in FAT32. Using the entire capacity of the media, we have a natural outcome: the Maxtor 5A300J0 connected via the Ultra ATA interface wins the test. It is much faster than the drives that work in other tested configurations, both in High-End Disk WinMark, which we consider a priority score, and in Business Disk WinMark. The external Maxtor OneTouch drive attached via FireWire is the second in this test – it is a bit faster than itself attached via USB 2.0. The winner, the Maxtor 5A300J0, becomes the slowest device when you install it into a STLab container and connect through USB 2.0.

You may note that the access time of the external Maxtor OneTouch drive is much higher than with the Maxtor 5A300J0. This 5-6msec difference is probably because of the fact that the drive in the Maxtor B14D300 works in the low-noise mode (it moves it heads with some latency to reduce the acoustic noise), which may lead to a performance reduction in certain cases.

After we reduce the drives’ capacity to 32GB, the Business WinMark score grows for all configurations. As for the High End Disk WinMark score, only the Maxtor 5A300J0 installed into the STLab container and attached via USB 2.0 improved it considerably. Other configurations didn’t do the same.

The access time doesn’t play an important role here and the difference is small enough. This may be the reason for the Maxtor 5A300J0 in the STLab rack and attached via USB 2.0 to nearly catch up with the OneTouch that works across the same interface.

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 ]


Comments currently: 3
Discussion started: 06/11/04 05:29:41 AM
Latest comment: 06/14/04 03:42:18 AM

View comments

Add your Comment