Roundup dischi SCSI 10.000rpm su xbitlabs

Redazione di Hardware Upg · 06-12-2001, 08:10

Link alla notizia : <a href="http://news.hwupgrade.it/5141.html">http://news.hwupgrade.it/5141.html</a>

Xbitlabs, a <a href=http://www.xbitlabs.com/storage/10000-scsi/>questo indirizzo, </a> ha pubblicato una prova comparativa che ha analizzato il comportamento di acuni hard disk SCSI dotati di regime di rotazione di 10.000 giri. I dischi presi in considerazione sono i seguenti: Maxtor Atlas 10K III, Quantum Atlas 10K II, Fujitsu MAN3367MP, IBM DDYS-T36950, Seagate Cheetah 73LP e Seagate Cheetah 36XL. Riportiamo le caratteristiche principali nella seguente tabella: 
</tr>
<tr align="middle">
<th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC">Heads</th>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">10</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">12</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">8</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">8</td>
</tr>
<tr align="middle">
<th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC">Platters</th>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">2</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">5</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">2</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">6</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4</td>
</tr>
<tr align="middle">
<th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC">Rotational
Latency</th>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">3ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">3ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">2.99ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">2.99ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">2.99ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">2.99ms</td>
</tr>
<tr align="middle">
<th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC">Average
Seek Time (Read)</th>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4.5ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4.7ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4.5ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4.9ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">4.9ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">5.4ms</td>
</tr>
<tr align="middle">
<th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC">Average
Track-to-Track 
Seek Time (Read)</th>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">0.3ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">0.6ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">0.4ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">0.5ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">0.6ms</td>
<td bgcolor="#E7E9EB">0.8ms</td>
</tr>
</table>
</center>
</div>
 
In seguito alle misurazioni effettuate ne esce vincitore il disco Maxtor Atlas 10KIII, recensito anche nel nostro laboratorio, la cui prova potrete trovare a <a href=http://www.hwupgrade.it/articoli/518/index.html>questo indirizzo.</a> 
Riportiamo di seguito le conclusioni direttamente tratte da xbitlabs: 

<blockquote>Well, our tests showed that Maxtor Atlas 10K III performs much better than Quantum Atlas 10K II in WinBench tests, however, in IOMeter it turned out considerably slower than the predecessor (especially at lower workload). Why? Is it because of the increased data density per platter or some other firmware optimization? Hard to say&#8230; 

However, there is something to make up for the slight performance lag of Atlas 10K III: it is quieter and cheaper to produce. And lower production costs result into lower retail price, that's quite logical :-)
 
Anyway, Maxtor Atlas 10K III yielded only to one rival, Fujitsu MAN, out of the entire majority of 10,000rpm HDDs. 

Quantum Atlas 10K II is a very interesting solution with excellent "server performance". Unfortunately, it will become very hard to get soon. 

Fujitsu MAN3367MP is the first SCSI hard disk drive from Fujitsu we got our hands on. And we liked it a real lot, we should say. No matter that it didn't win in file tests, the results shown in server benchmarks were strikingly high. This HDD appeared especially efficient in case of highest workload. 

Seagate Cheetah 73LP revealed impressively high performance some time ago, but time passes and it doesn't seem that fast any more. Its major trump, a combination of large storage capacity (73GB) and high speed, are no longer a threat to the competitors, which hard disk drives boasting the same maximum storage capacity are as fast as our hero or even faster. So, we are very curious to find out what could we expect from Seagate next year. 

Seagate Cheetah 36XL is a hard disk drive, which showed very interesting results. The graph showing the dependence of the performance in IOMeter on the workload is very far from standards and hence arouses a lot of questions. Maybe it has something to do with SAMS (Seagate's Advanced Multi Drive System optimizes performance in server and RAID applications). However, we don't know anything for sure&#8230; 

IBM DDYS-T36950 is an old solution from IBM, which can't stand any serious competition against younger and more progressive rivals. The company's reputation can be saved only by the new IBM 73LZX family, which should appear in the market very soon now. 

</blockquote>

alexievic · 14-01-2002, 14:36

Maxtor Atlas 10K III = Quantum Atlas 10K III ? Perchè mettere il "vecchio" 10K II che lo sanno tutti che Maxtor e Quantum sono la stessa cosa?

06-12-2001, 08:10	#1
Redazione di Hardware Upg www.hwupgrade.it Iscritto dal: Jul 2001 Messaggi: 75166	Link alla notizia : <a href="http://news.hwupgrade.it/5141.html">http://news.hwupgrade.it/5141.html</a> Xbitlabs, a <a href=http://www.xbitlabs.com/storage/10000-scsi/>questo indirizzo, </a> ha pubblicato una prova comparativa che ha analizzato il comportamento di acuni hard disk SCSI dotati di regime di rotazione di 10.000 giri. I dischi presi in considerazione sono i seguenti: Maxtor Atlas 10K III, Quantum Atlas 10K II, Fujitsu MAN3367MP, IBM DDYS-T36950, Seagate Cheetah 73LP e Seagate Cheetah 36XL. Riportiamo le caratteristiche principali nella seguente tabella:<BR><BR> </tr> <tr align="middle"> <th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">Heads</font></th> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">10</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">12</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">8</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">8</font></td> </tr> <tr align="middle"> <th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">Platters</font></th> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">2</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">5</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">2</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">6</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4</font></td> </tr> <tr align="middle"> <th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">Rotational Latency</font></th> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">3ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">3ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">2.99ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">2.99ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">2.99ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">2.99ms</font></td> </tr> <tr align="middle"> <th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">Average Seek Time (Read)</font></th> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4.5ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4.7ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4.5ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4.9ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">4.9ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">5.4ms</font></td> </tr> <tr align="middle"> <th align="left" bgcolor="#B5B6CC"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">Average Track-to-Track<br> Seek Time (Read)</font></th> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">0.3ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">0.6ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">0.4ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">0.5ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">0.6ms</font></td> <td bgcolor="#E7E9EB"><font class="smalltahoma" face="Arial" size="2">0.8ms</font></td> </tr> </table> </center> </div> <BR><BR> In seguito alle misurazioni effettuate ne esce vincitore il disco Maxtor Atlas 10KIII, recensito anche nel nostro laboratorio, la cui prova potrete trovare a <a href=http://www.hwupgrade.it/articoli/518/index.html>questo indirizzo.</a><BR><BR> Riportiamo di seguito le conclusioni direttamente tratte da xbitlabs:<BR><BR> <blockquote><i>Well, our tests showed that Maxtor Atlas 10K III performs much better than Quantum Atlas 10K II in WinBench tests, however, in IOMeter it turned out considerably slower than the predecessor (especially at lower workload). Why? Is it because of the increased data density per platter or some other firmware optimization? Hard to say&#8230; <BR><BR> However, there is something to make up for the slight performance lag of Atlas 10K III: it is quieter and cheaper to produce. And lower production costs result into lower retail price, that's quite logical :-) <BR><BR> Anyway, Maxtor Atlas 10K III yielded only to one rival, Fujitsu MAN, out of the entire majority of 10,000rpm HDDs. <BR><BR> <b>Quantum Atlas 10K</b> II is a very interesting solution with excellent "server performance". Unfortunately, it will become very hard to get soon. <BR><BR> <b>Fujitsu MAN3367MP</b> is the first SCSI hard disk drive from Fujitsu we got our hands on. And we liked it a real lot, we should say. No matter that it didn't win in file tests, the results shown in server benchmarks were strikingly high. This HDD appeared especially efficient in case of highest workload. <BR><BR> <b>Seagate Cheetah 73LP</b> revealed impressively high performance some time ago, but time passes and it doesn't seem that fast any more. Its major trump, a combination of large storage capacity (73GB) and high speed, are no longer a threat to the competitors, which hard disk drives boasting the same maximum storage capacity are as fast as our hero or even faster. So, we are very curious to find out what could we expect from Seagate next year. <BR><BR> <b>Seagate Cheetah 36XL</b> is a hard disk drive, which showed very interesting results. The graph showing the dependence of the performance in IOMeter on the workload is very far from standards and hence arouses a lot of questions. Maybe it has something to do with SAMS (Seagate's Advanced Multi Drive System optimizes performance in server and RAID applications). However, we don't know anything for sure&#8230; <BR><BR> <b>IBM DDYS-T36950</b> is an old solution from IBM, which can't stand any serious competition against younger and more progressive rivals. The company's reputation can be saved only by the new IBM 73LZX family, which should appear in the market very soon now. <BR><BR> </i></blockquote>

14-01-2002, 14:36	#2
alexievic Member Iscritto dal: Oct 2001 Città: Forlì Messaggi: 268	Maxtor Atlas 10K III = Quantum Atlas 10K III ? Perchè mettere il "vecchio" 10K II che lo sanno tutti che Maxtor e Quantum sono la stessa cosa?

Strumenti
Mostra una versione stampabile Invia questa pagina per email