The RAID0 arrays are in the lead under this Workstation load. The degraded RAID10 feels surprisingly good, being close to the healthy array at short queue depths.

As expected the calculation of the second checksum lowers the performance of the RAID6 relative to the RAID5. The degraded arrays are good enough, excepting the RAID6 w/o two disks that is slower than the single HDD at every queue depth. Interestingly, the difference between the latter two disk subsystems is negligible at queue depths of 8 through 16: this must be the preferable load for the degraded RAID6.

Well, you should not build checksum-based arrays for workstations unless you need high data security. The 4-disk RAID0 outperforms the 8-disk RAID6 and is close to the RAID5. The 4-disk RAID10 looks good enough, too.

When the test zone is limited to 32 gigabytes, the RAID0 get even faster than the RAID10.

The RAID5 increase their advantage over the RAID6, too. Take note that the degraded arrays feel better with the limited test zone: the RAID6 w/o two disks is faster than the single HDD.

The RAID0 improve their standings when the test zone is reduced to 32GB.