Articles: Storage
 

Bookmark and Share

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

Performance in Intel IOMeter WorkStation Pattern

This pattern features a greater share of write requests, so we should see different results here:

Although the leader hasn’t changed (it’s still the controller from Promise in its WT incarnation), the integrated controller from VIA Technologies shares the second position with the one from Silicon Image. As we have noticed earlier, this controller likes write requests and low workloads.

Anyway, Acard and Intel remained among the leaders. The controllers from LSI, HighPoint and Adaptec are the slowest, although the gap is small.

The Workstation32 pattern differs from the regular Workstation pattern by the fact that it only uses first 32GB of the array’s address space.

By narrowing the “operational zone” of the test, we leveled up the results of the controllers. The leader is the same, while the poor controller from VIA is now closer to the end of the list. The outsiders exchanged their places: Adaptec is now faster than HighPoint.

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

Discussion

Comments currently: 5
Discussion started: 02/03/04 03:15:58 PM
Latest comment: 03/20/04 10:55:32 AM

View comments

Add your Comment