Articles: Storage

Bookmark and Share

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

The RAID0 arrays show tough competition in the Workstation pattern. The position of the HDD in the table of results depends on the request queue depth. The Hitachi is ahead at short depths whereas the WD4000ABYS prefers longer depths. Take note that the WD4000YS isn’t brilliant at small queue depths, sharing last place with the Seagate. Samsung’s T133S series drives are the slowest at long queue depths.

Western Digital is superior in RAID10, too. The WD4000YS is rivaled by the Hitachi, but the WD4000ABYS is unchallenged. The Seagate takes last place here, being especially slow at small queue depths.

Western Digital’s HDDs are again in the lead. The Hitachi is the worst drive at processing write requests in a RAID5.

When the test zone is limited to a 32GB partition, the competition grows tougher. The Hitachi is unrivalled in a RAID0 at small queue depths. The WD4000ABYS goes ahead at long queue depths. The Seagate is the slowest drive at low loads.

The leader is the same in RAID10 but second place goes to the Hitachi. It is hard to name the loser because the Seagate is closer to the Samsung team at low loads and overtakes them at high loads.

The Hitachi is not so bad in a RAID5 when the test zone is limited to the fastest area of the platters.

Note that the “quiet” T166S has been about as fast as the other drives from Samsung throughout these tests.

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


Comments currently: 0

Add your Comment