Reviews Leaderboard Database Reference Search StorageReview Discussion Reliability Survey Search About StorageReview.com Contents

Atlas 10k II vs. Cheetah 36LP


StorageReview.com PayPal Donations



Quantum's Atlas 10k II vs. Seagate's Cheetah 36LP: A Grudge Match!
  July 16, 2000 Author: Eugene Ra  

IOMeter Performance

 Testbed II  IOMeter - Workstation Access Pattern - Total I/Os per second Details... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

The newer Atlas 10k II does not fare as well as our original sample in IOMeter. It starts with the new unit lagging the old by about 2% in a Linear Workstation scenario... this gap widens to 5% and 6% respectively under Moderate and Heavy loads.

Seagate's drive, on the other hand, exhibits some slight improvements across the board. The new drive improves over the original by a tiny 1% in the Linear Workstation load. This improvement, however, peaks to a 6% gain under Heavy loads.

These reversals lead to an interesting change in the Cheetah vs. Atlas story as told by IOMeter. Judged with our original units, the Atlas 10k II possessed a marginal advantage over the Cheetah 36LP. Now things are reversed. Due to its superior seek time, the Atlas retains a lead of 4% under a Linear load. In every other case, however, the Cheetah leads. Very Light, Light, and Moderate loads peg the Cheetah 5% ahead of the Quantum. The margin increases to a significant 10% under a heavy load.

 Conclusion...


HOME | ARTICLES | LEADERBOARD | PERFORMANCE DATABASE | REFERENCE GUIDE
COMMUNITY | RELIABILITY SURVEY | SUPPORT SR! | ABOUT SR |

Copyright © 1998-2005 StorageReview.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
Write: Webmaster