Articles: Storage
 

Bookmark and Share

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

The third graph shows the HDDs performance when the requests queue reached 256. Again, no principal differences from the two previous cases. WD2500B007 is considerably faster than Maxtor 5000DV.

Now let’s take a look at the situation when both drives work via FireWire interface.

The first graph shows the HDDs performance in case of the minimal queue. I have to say that the situation remained unchanged, even though we are testing with a different interface now. Just like in case of USB 2.0, WD2500B007 works much faster than Maxtor 5000DV.

The second graph shows the situation for queue=16 requests. Here both models work faster than in the previous case. Moreover, the requests are processed at a maximum speed when there are no writes, then it drops a little, and then it grows up again. Anyway, this doesn’t change the overall situation and WD2500B007 remains ahead.

Finally the third graph shows how fast the drives are when the queue equals 256. Here both models run faster. I could even point out that the curves got shaped slightly differently. Namely, Maxtor 5000DV lagged behind a tiny bit during reads processing and suffered the maximum performance drop in case of 100% writes. WD2500B007 is still ahead and is the most efficient during lazy writes processing.

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

Discussion

Comments currently: 1
Discussion started: 02/29/04 11:55:36 PM
Latest comment: 02/29/04 11:55:36 PM

View comments

Add your Comment