Articles: Storage
 

Bookmark and Share

(5) 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 ]

Now let’s take a look at the performance of our testing participants in the RAID 1 configurations.

The first graph shows the results obtained under linear workload. All integral parameters indicate Intel ICH6R as a winner here. Until the share of write requests hits 80% the Intel solution manages to outpace all other controllers. The second Intel controller is faster than SiS964 and VIA VT8237 in case of smaller share of writes among the processed requests, but as this number increases, its performance drops down. As a result, the second prize is won by SiS964, which manages to reach its maximum performance with 90% writes. VIA solution is running right behind it all the time.

With 16 requests queue depth both Intel controllers show smaller performance results as the share of writes increases. VIA and SiS solutions perform moderately but more stably proving efficient independent of the share of writes. The fastest solution here is Intel ICH6R. While SiS964 looks overall more attractive than the VIA VT8237.

The last graph displays the results for 256 requests queue. We see that both Intel fellows run almost equally fast here, ICH6R being slightly ahead. VIA and SiS products also proved very close to one another, SiS964 being maybe a little bit better. However, they are still quite far behind Intel’s solutions, managing to outpace them only in case of big writes share.

 
Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 ]

Discussion

Comments currently: 5
Discussion started: 12/07/04 12:34:31 AM
Latest comment: 04/17/05 09:13:33 AM

View comments

Add your Comment