Web-Server, File-Server Patterns
The drives are tested under loads typical of servers. The names of the patterns are self-explanatory. The results are presented as performance ratings which are calculated as the average speed of the drive at every load.
The results of this read-only pattern are rather boring. Besides the fact that WD’s 1.5-terabyte products meet no competition, we can note that the new firmware improves the performance of the Hitachi drive a little, that the Caviar Black Y6 is somewhat slower than its predecessor, and that the new Caviar Green is ahead of the older model from the same series (that’s not a surprise considering their results in the read response time test).
The results get more interesting as this pattern includes a share of write operations. Samsung’s drives based on the new platform betray some flaws in their firmware as they all slow down when the request queue gets longer. Hitachi’s new firmware provides a small but noticeable performance increase at long queue depths. The WD Caviar Blue is not as good as its Black cousins. And finally, we have to note once again that the WD Caviar Green S8 performs awfully as it lacks deferred writing.