For all intents and purposes this test shows drive performance under normal daily activity for most users. Last but not least, productivity is an identical story; there is no credible performance difference between the 3. It is unknown at this point, however, whether this difference will also be apparent with hard drives. In this trace we recorded MB being written to the drive and 7,MB being read. On the flip side, notice the RAID1 3. Today we will investigate the difference using fourth-generation Seagate Savvio 10K. Both support the same RAID levels.
|Date Added:||2 October 2011|
|File Size:||65.16 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
In part two, we investigate whether 6.
LSI MegaRAID i and ELP Review: Part Two | – Storage Reviews
On the flip side, notice the RAID1 3. The trace psi the heavy read activity of each game loading from the start, as well as textures as the game progresses.
These drives are optimized for server-style loads, especially ones involving multiple requests. Given the low data transfer rate, it is unlikely this is a result of the 3. If you plan on sticking with hard drives for the long haul, it is probably not a wise financial decision to upgrade to psi 6.
LSI 9260-8i 512mb PCIe 8 Port SAS SATA 6gb/s LP MegaRAID Controller Lsi00202
In this trace we recorded 2,MB being written to the drive and 1,MB being read. Additionally, both cards use a PCI-express 2. Tintri releases TGC 4.
Given we are using the same hard drives for all the benchmarks, the differences you see are a direct result of the RAID configurations and the RAID cards.
In this trace we recorded 4,MB being written to the drive and 2,MB being read.
The write speeds in both cases are well ahead of the 6. Our lzi benchmark focuses on the read performance of the drives. This presents a more realistic look of what to expect performance-wise between the 3. We can see generally identical performance across all of the RAID configurations between 3.
This next set of benchmarks are for random reads and writes. Samsung ZET Review. This is not an unexpected result given hard drives, even the ultra high-performance Seagate Savvio enterprise drives we used for testing can’t take full advantage of 3.
In part one of this reviewwe looked at the feasibility of buying this RAID card to get 6. Today we will investigate the difference using fourth-generation Seagate Savvio 10K.
Our next real-life test covers disk activity in a lsj environment. In this read performance-focused test, the RAID5 setups come out on top. In this test we include: To date we have not tested a platter-based drive that was able to consistently saturate SATA 3. Last but not least, productivity is an identical story; there is no credible performance difference between the 3.
Not to be confused with ordinary 2. The i is the faster of the two, offering a faster processor and cache speed.
LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i and 8888ELP Review: Part Two
The one interesting takeaway from this benchmark is the difference in read speeds between the 3. It is unknown at this point, however, whether this difference will also be apparent with hard drives. Both support the same RAID levels. In this trace we recorded MB being written to the drive and 7,MB being read.
Our last real-life test covers disk activity in a productivity scenario. The drive is available in GB and GB capacities.
RAID1 is much slower on both reads and writes since data is not striped across one or ksi drives.
Unlike the HTPC trace, this one relies heavily on the read performance of a drive. We 92260 seeing some discrepancies with the RAID0 3.
Our real-world benchmarks provide the best indication of what to expect from these drives in actual usage scenarios.