FAT32 File System
Now let’s see what we have in FAT32.
The HDDs from Samsung and Western Digital are competing for top place when creating files on a RAID0.
We have the same leaders when the HDDs are combined into RAID10 arrays. Well, the WD4000ABYS is the only drive from Western Digital to be in the lead here. The WD4000YS is a loser together with the Seagate.
Samsung’s HDDs look the best of all in a RAID5 array. The Seagate and Hitachi produce the worst results. The Hitachi obviously doesn’t like to perform reading in a RAID5.
Samsung’s T133S series drives are again victorious when reading from a RAID0. It is only on small files that they allow the Seagate to take top position.
Samsung’s T133S drives are in the lead in a RAID10 array as well, but they are now rivaled by the WD4000ABYS. The other drive from WD is the slowest through all the file-sets.
We’ve got the same winners and losers when reading from RAID5 arrays.
Copying within the same partition on a RAID0 proves to be a complex test. The drives jump from top to bottom position depending on the file-set. We can only name the worst one here, which is the WD4000YS again.
It’s all normal with RAID10: the WD4000ABYS and the Samsung T133S drives are competing for top place.
Samsung’s HDDs are in the lead in a RAID5 array, too. As opposed to the server tests, they seem to like such loads better.
Samsung’s HDDs are still fast when copying from one partition to another in a RAID0 array but are somewhat slower than the Seagate on large and small files. Both drives from Western Digital sink to bottom places.
We’ve got the typical situation with RAID10: the WD4000ABYS and Samsung’s HDDs are in the lead. The WD4000YS is the loser.
Samsung’s HDDs win this test, too. They enjoy a particular large advantage on small files but are rivaled by the Hitachi on large files.