Articles: Storage
 

Bookmark and Share

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

Performance in Intel IOMeter Sequential Read and Write Patterns

During the performance tests in these patterns we check how well the HDD can cope with ordered requests with linearly growing address. The requests queue depth starts at 4 requests and then once per minute the size of the requested data block increases. The highest results in the tables below are highlighted with the blue color.

At first we will consider the performance of our testing participants with the USB 2.0 interface.

The graph for Sequential Reading shows that WD2500B007 outperforms its rival when processing small data blocks and yields to Maxtor 5000DV when the data blocks grow bigger. As a result, the performance difference in maximum read speeds of the tested drives exceeds 5MB.

The sequential write graph looks completely different. WD2500B007 HDD is faster than its competitor on almost all data blocks. The advantage is most evident on all data blocks up to 32KB: the only exception is 1KB data block.

Now let’s take a look at the drives performance when they worked via FireWire interface.

The read speed graphs show that WD2500B007 outpaces Maxtor 5000DV in small data blocks and demonstrates higher performance than with USB 2.0 interface up to 128KB data blocks. However, then its performance drops. Unlike its rival, Maxtor 5000DVis more consistent, its graph is free from any sharp jumps. The read speed of the largest data blocks is about 10MB/sec higher than the performance of WD2500B007.

The write speed results on the graph above indicate that WD2500B007 is always a little faster than its opponent.

 
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