Here's where things get interesting. As was the case in WinBench 99
, the Cheetah 18XL produces measurable gains when compared to the 36LP
despite their similar access times
. In an access pattern
that simulates workstation usage
, the 18XL slides past the 36LP by 6% under a linear load
. The difference becomes greater as load increases... all the way up to an 11% advantage under heavy loads.
How does the Cheetah 18XL, however, compare to the Atlas 10k II? We've got some very intriguing results here. The Atlas' superior seek time grants it a small advantage over the 18XL when it comes to a linear workstation scenario. In all other cases, however, the Cheetah 18XL bests the Atlas 10k II! The difference under a heavy load, for example, is 7.5%. The Cheetah likes lighter loads best, however, where we find it leading the Quantum drive by a substantial 12%. When it comes to workstation usage, the 18XL is the faster drive.
It's important to note that in other scenarios, such as File Server or Database access patterns, the race is much closer. In such usage, the Atlas 10k II manages to hold on to its lead in Linear, Medium, and Heavy loads. The Cheetah 18XL, however, sneaks past in Very Light and Light situations.
We invite readers to peruse the StorageReview.com Database for a full breakdown of IOMeter differences.