Intel IOMeter Workstation Pattern
These patterns emulate applications working with the NTFS file system. There’s a large share of write requests here, so HDDs other than the WD4000KS have got a chance :).
Well… The drives from Western Digital are still in the lead. The two older models are the leaders at low loads, and the new model at high loads.
In RAID5 mode the WD4000KS overtakes the older drives from WD at even lower loads than in RAID0. Is it the result of a “virtual load increase”?
The picture for RAID10 mode doesn’t differ much from what you’ve seen in RAID5 mode.
It is also interesting to know how the results may be affected by the reduction of the test’s operating zone to 32 gigabytes.
As you can see, the Hitachi drive is very sensitive to the reduction of the test zone. This drive has fewer heads than the others, and this reduction narrows the platter zone the heads are moving within. Thus, the chance of a short seek is increased and the average time to process a read or write request is reduced.
Well, this helps the Hitachi in its struggle with the HDDs from WD at low loads only.
Hitachi’s secret weapon doesn’t work with RAID5. I guess that it is more important to have aggressive deferred writing algorithms here.
It’s strange to see the Maxtor lagging behind. It seems to be the only one not to benefit from the reduction of the test zone. Or perhaps it just doesn’t like to work in RAID5?
In RAID10 mode the Hitachi drive leaves the WD4000KS behind at low loads, but that’s all it can do. The Maxtor looks much better in RAID10 than in the previous case.
Summing it up, the HDDs from Western Digital have been superior in the workstation tests, too.