PCMark05

We use the HDD test suite within PCMark05 for further comparative hard disk scores as it provides a mixture of actual application results and specific read/write percentages used by these programs. The program utilizes the RankDisk application within the Intel iPEAK SPT suite of tools to record a trace of disk activity during usage of real world applications. PCMark05 then replays these traces to generate performance measurements based upon the actual disk operations within each application. The HDD test suite contains 53% read and 47% write operations with each trace section utilizing varied amounts of read or write operations. Our test results use the following trace runs:

Windows XP Startup: This test consists of 90% reading and 10% writes which tracks XP activities at start-up.

Application Loading: This test consists of 83% reading and 17% writes and tracks the opening and closing of the following programs.

  • Microsoft Word
  • Adobe Acrobat Reader
  • Windows Media Player
  • 3Dmark 2001SE
  • Leadtek WinFast DVD
  • Mozilla Internet Browser

General Hard Disk Drive Usage: This test consists of 60% reading and 40% writes which monitors application usage utilizing the following settings.

  • Opening a Microsoft Word document, performing grammar check, saving and closing.
  • Compression and decompression using WinZip
  • Encrypting and decrypting a file using PowerCrypt
  • Scanning files for viruses using F-Secure Antivirus
  • Playing an MP3 file with Winamp
  • Playing a WAV file with Winamp
  • Playing a DivX video using DivX codec and Windows Media Player
  • Playing a WMV video file using Windows Media Player
  • Viewing pictures using Windows Picture Viewer
  • Browsing the Internet using Microsoft Internet Explorer
  • Loading, playing and exiting a game with Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon

PCMark05
- XP Startup


PCMark05
- Application Startup


PCMark05
- General Usage


PCMark05
- Virus Scan


PCMark05
- File Write

In almost all tests, the controller (ICH9R) on our Gigabyte P35-DQ6 motherboard outperforms the Muse. Even for the tests which are primarily based on pure throughput rather than seek performance (the file write and the virus scan tests), the Muse fails to take advantage of the second disk in its RAID 0 array, coming in basically at par with a single disk on the motherboard controller.

Linear mode, which is the disabling of all core functionality found in the Muse R-Duo, proves to be the best performing of the functions available. RAID 1 provides solid (though uninspiring) performance through all benchmarks, though we see the same 15-30% performance drop compared to a single drive consistently in our tests. Most disappointing is Big mode, which trails in almost all tests.

Acoustics and Thermals WinRAR and Windows Vista Startup/Shutdown
Comments Locked

11 Comments

View All Comments

  • Zak - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    I've gone through 4 dual drive enclosures and concluded that anything with fan smaller than 80mm is too loud. They were usually louder than my computer so I don't expect this one to be any better. I've settled for SansDigital 4-drive USB eclosure in JBOD mode. Their 4-drive SATA is also a great value but I couldn't get the included SATA card to work properly neither under OSX nor Windows XP so it went back. But I'd like to see some reviews of SansDigital hardware, they have some nice offerings.

    Zak
  • MrPickins - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    I'm sure I missed it when reading the article, but what type of connection were you using for the benchmarks?

    I'd assume eSATA, but I'd also like to see how the enclosure performs using the USB interface.
  • Dave Robinet - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    Yep - eSATA was used. It's tough to imagine a lot of USB use for this sort of device, to be honest, so that wasn't tested.

    Thanks a lot for reading!
  • Magendanz - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    I believe this unit uses the Silicon Image SiI5744 Storage Processor, which has frequent firmware updates and a decent utility called SteelVine Manager for configuring and monitoring the chipset. I purchased a similar unit called the ONNTO DataWhale from CoolDrives and have been very happy with it. (The DataWhale has removeable drive trays, which I like.)

    It's interesting to note that the SteelVine products have support for SAFE33 and SAFE50 modes (which split the drives into RAID 1 and BIG partitions) as well as an advanced GUI configuration mode that allows you to configure combined modes manually. On the DataWhale, this was enabled with an internal jumper and I'd expect the Muse also has this. Just pull the jumper and set the DIP switches to SAFE mode, then you can configure to your heart's content using SteelVine Manager.

    Note: The latest version of SteelVine Manager requires the latest firmware update, but since SteelVine Manager is required to update the firmware this results in a bit of a Catch 22. Just install an older version of SteelVine Manager, install the firmware update, and then update to the latest version.
  • Yawgm0th - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    The definition of RAID 1 listed in the article is not correct. In a standard RAID 1, the drives are mirrored and presented as a single volume to the operating system. However, they will both be accessed simultaneously during all read and write actions. This is why RAID 1 generally results in a substantial increase in read speeds but a slight decrease in write speeds.

    This is true if you are doing a software RAID, in which case the operating system or RAID software knows to do this, and with a hardware RAID, in which case the controller automatically reads and writes to both drives simultaneously. Anything else is not RAID 1.

    The definition listed for RAID 1 in this article describes a behind-the-scenes backup, which is not RAID 1. If this is the case, it ought to be given more mention in the article. One of the biggest benefits to using RAID 1 is not just the high reliability, but the greatly increased read speeds. If the described method is what's in use, then it's a serious flaw in the device.
  • Dave Robinet - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    The device does provide true RAID 1 in its normal sense. My choice of words was meant to illustrate the way the end-user sees the device, and it's substantially easier to say "show one device, then use the other".

    The reality of RAID 1 is that the OS reads from only one drive, so the basic definition is essentially true, though. I'll see about cleaning up the wording to satisfy both clarity and to make it more accurate. Good catch!
  • yyrkoon - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    $143 usd is not a terribly large sum of money, but if you look into alternatives, you can get the addonics 2port port Multiplier, and do the same thing for cheaper. Then again, you'd have to either build your own enclosure, or buy one. I wouldnt be surprised if this device in fact uses the addonics port multiplier . . .

    All the above said, I would have to agree in wondering if RAID really has a place on the desktop(or most workstations and servers for that matter), as there are so many 'better' ways to store data safely without even using RAID in the first place. Database servers storing mission critical data MAY need RAID for an added form of reliability, but probably do not need RAID for performance, as any self respecting database admin is probably using a static ram HDD device, or possibly a large RAM disk(assuming balls out performance is even needed).

    I cannot really help but wonder if a software RAID array, on a multiple core system would outperform this device or not. That and the fact with tools such as rsync, and just storing important files on multiple drives wouldn't be as safe, without the hassles/complications that RAID can bring into the big picture. The cost definately would be less . . .
  • cserwin - Friday, December 14, 2007 - link

    I've had to explain to too many family members that their digital photos are gone-baby-gone because they haven't backed them up.

    I think RAID 1 is critical for digital photos.

    ESATA give the advantage of allowing direct management of the photos on the redundant array without any appreciable loss of performance, and it is very portable for upgrades. It is way more functional than USB 'backup' solutions - especially for me, who gets the phone call when my uncle/mom/sister/aunt is having a problem.
  • yyrkoon - Saturday, December 15, 2007 - link

    Sorry, but RAID 1 is not going to magically fix all of everyones problems. What happens if bobby-sue's kid deletes (a la shift delete) all their families image files, or disk corruption creeps onto a single somehow, while mirroring to the second ? Try explaining to a family that their Photos and other data files are bye-bye-gone after you recommended that they spend twice as much in HDDs plus controller(if needed).

    DeltaCopy:
    http://www.aboutmyip.com/AboutMyXApp/DeltaCopy.jsp">http://www.aboutmyip.com/AboutMyXApp/DeltaCopy.jsp

    Smart partitioning + DeltaCopy + offsite optical media storage may not be perfect, but is a good bit smarter than just adding another point of failure to a storage syst
  • Magendanz - Sunday, December 16, 2007 - link

    Fortunately, Vista and Windows Server shadow copies prevents data loss in these scenarios.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now