|
The Escalade 7000 Series Revisited: 3Ware's Escalade 7450 |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|---|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
The Escalade 7000 Series Revisited: 3Ware's Escalade 7450
WinBench Results...
 Due to the consistently unrepresentative WinBench Diskmark scores we've been getting in our RAID reviews, we're no longer going to bother to comment on them in RAID articles. We'll continue to present them for the sake of completeness, but the only WinBench tests that we'll discuss are the sustained transfer rate, access time, and CPU utilization tests.
Base Scores...
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, 1 Drive | 3Ware Escalade 7410, 1 Drive | 3Ware Escalade 7450, 1 Drive | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, 1 drive |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
4454 |
4406 |
3592 |
6110 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
15200 |
15160 |
11140 |
14940 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 15300 |
16440 |
15820 |
12980 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 62480 |
61900 |
27220 |
63020 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 19580 |
19880 |
17840 |
19100 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 8502 |
8242 |
7568 |
8802 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 13460 |
13160 |
8920 |
12840 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 14820 |
15000 |
11160 |
16280 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 14520 |
14360 |
7308 |
14340 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 29800 |
29633 |
29800 |
29700 |
| End (KB/sec) | 17500 |
17500 |
17500 |
17400 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 14.04 |
15.38 |
15.14 |
15.62 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 3.11 |
3.12 |
3.16 |
2.67 |
| |
Nothing too exciting here... The Escalade 7450's access time is a bit lower than that of the 7410, but nothing may be concluded from this test alone.
RAID 0...
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, RAID 0, 2 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7410, RAID 0, 2 drives | 3Ware Escalade 7450, RAID 0, 2 Drives | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, RAID 0, 2 drives |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
3944 |
3676 |
3908 |
6116 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
13540 |
13400 |
13480 |
17840 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 15660 |
15860 |
16200 |
13640 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 31360 |
29560 |
31220 |
61340 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 16500 |
16020 |
16720 |
17800 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 10532 |
10580 |
10460 |
12760 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 12020 |
11480 |
11960 |
16220 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 14300 |
14280 |
14100 |
21040 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 8910 |
9070 |
8730 |
17020 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 59600 |
59200 |
58233 |
59000 |
| End (KB/sec) | 35000 |
34900 |
34900 |
34800 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 15.2 |
15.18 |
15.20 |
15.52 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 3.07 |
3.21 |
3.25 |
2.64 |
| |
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, RAID 0, 3 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7410, RAID 0, 3 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7450, RAID 0, 3 Drives | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, RAID 0, 3 drives |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
3992 |
4040 |
4030 |
6206 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
14820 |
14740 |
14700 |
17620 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 17160 |
17220 |
17460 |
15300 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 30560 |
31260 |
34380 |
61080 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 15820 |
17140 |
16540 |
18280 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 12460 |
12620 |
12600 |
9864 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 14680 |
12760 |
12080 |
17840 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 14920 |
15240 |
14960 |
21800 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 9744 |
9736 |
10032 |
17500 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 85833 |
88700 |
88133 |
88333 |
| End (KB/sec) | 52300 |
52400 |
52400 |
52200 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 15.18 |
15.14 |
15.04 |
15.44 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 3.20 |
3.18 |
3.27 |
2.71 |
| |
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, RAID 0, 4 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7410, RAID 0, 4 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7450, RAID 0, 4 Drives | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, RAID 0, 4 drives |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
4372 |
4300 |
4236 |
6384 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
15080 |
15180 |
15140 |
16900 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 16360 |
16120 |
16880 |
15280 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 33380 |
33720 |
34300 |
61340 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 16040 |
16760 |
16160 |
17920 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 13740 |
13940 |
13860 |
8720 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 13640 |
12420 |
12620 |
17720 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 14780 |
15420 |
15080 |
20920 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 10328 |
11000 |
10740 |
17300 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 102667 |
107000 |
116000 |
109333 |
| End (KB/sec) | 69600 |
69833 |
69867 |
69633 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 15.4 |
14.96 |
14.88 |
15.02 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 88.80 |
88.83 |
88.97 |
88.3 |
| |
3Ware continues to find new ways to push the maximum realizable bandwidth of the standard 32-bit/33MHz PCI bus to levels that most (including myself) never thought possible. The Escalade 7450's score of 116MB/sec is 9MB/sec higher than that of the 7410, and 6MB/sec higher than the second-place ATA RAID 2400A.
RAID 1...
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, RAID 1, 2 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7410, RAID 1, 2 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7450, RAID 1, 2 Drives | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, RAID 1, 2 Drives |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
3608 |
3560 |
3520 |
5158 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
11660 |
11520 |
11740 |
13580 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 16180 |
17440 |
17460 |
11380 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 27300 |
26720 |
29620 |
57240 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 17560 |
17920 |
17780 |
14240 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 8100 |
7790 |
7786 |
8324 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 9530 |
9546 |
9680 |
11680 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 11760 |
11240 |
11600 |
16220 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 7646 |
7460 |
7664 |
13940 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 47600 |
49667 |
49333 |
29600 |
| End (KB/sec) | 27467 |
27900 |
29300 |
17400 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 13.5 |
13.42 |
13.52 |
15.50 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 3.10 |
3.17 |
3.22 |
2.54 |
| |
The 7450's RAID 1 WinBench scores are, unsurprisingly, virtually identical to the 7410's.
RAID 10...
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, RAID 10, 4 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7410, RAID 10, 4 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7450, RAID 10, 4 Drives | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, RAID 01, 4 Drives |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
3892 |
3694 |
3770 |
5244 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
13000 |
12680 |
13080 |
9718 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 14980 |
15880 |
16560 |
11300 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 32200 |
31100 |
33060 |
54980 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 16600 |
16380 |
16360 |
15160 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 10400 |
9340 |
10140 |
3002 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 10584 |
11280 |
10520 |
5650 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 13280 |
12900 |
13080 |
8276 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 8862 |
8224 |
8922 |
11020 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 59933 |
59600 |
59967 |
59167 |
| End (KB/sec) | 46633 |
35000 |
49600 |
34867 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 13.5 |
15.22 |
13.52 |
15.64 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 3.04 |
3.20 |
3.24 |
2.64 |
| |
The 7450's RAID 10 access time in WinBench returns to Escalade 6400 territory - about 1.7ms lower than that of the 7410. In the Escalade 7410 review, however, IOMeter seemed to disagree with this disparity between the 7410 and 6400 (i.e., scores under linear load were very similar), so we're not sure what (if anything) to make of this.
RAID 5...
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, RAID 5, 3 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7410, RAID 5, 3 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7450, RAID 5, 3 Drives | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, RAID 5, 3 Drives |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
2120 |
1842 |
2024 |
3816 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
4792 |
4370 |
5782 |
5378 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 13580 |
13060 |
12600 |
11780 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 12200 |
13700 |
14680 |
46680 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 10644 |
11680 |
9056 |
16080 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 1884 |
2250 |
3532 |
2254 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 2304 |
2554 |
3826 |
3036 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 3728 |
4106 |
6116 |
4822 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 3328 |
3500 |
4286 |
6570 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 58833 |
59167 |
59300 |
59067 |
| End (KB/sec) | 34933 |
35000 |
34967 |
34833 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 15.2 |
15.32 |
15.26 |
15.60 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 3.11 |
3.11 |
3.16 |
2.69 |
| |
|
Ziff Davis WinBench 99 under Windows 2000 Professional using NTFS
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
| 3Ware Escalade 6400, RAID 5, 4 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7410, RAID 5, 4 Drives | 3Ware Escalade 7450, RAID 5, 4 Drives | Adaptec ATA RAID 2400A, RAID 5, 4 Drives |
|---|
| Business Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
2378 |
1894 |
2158 |
5620 |
| High-End Disk WinMark 99 (KB/sec) |
6488 |
4758 |
6526 |
12760 |
| AVS/Express 3.4 (KB/sec) | 14320 |
13540 |
15100 |
13600 |
| FrontPage 98 (KB/sec) | 12480 |
15720 |
14240 |
58920 |
| MicroStation SE (KB/sec) | 11880 |
11880 |
10180 |
17020 |
| Photoshop 4.0 (KB/sec) | 1988 |
2418 |
3892 |
6440 |
| Premiere 4.2 (KB/sec) | 2522 |
2780 |
4304 |
9928 |
| Sound Forge 4.0 (KB/sec) | 4070 |
4586 |
6840 |
16200 |
| Visual C++ (KB/sec) | 3590 |
3892 |
4972 |
12420 |
|
| Disk/Read Transfer Rate | StorageReview.com |
|---|
| Beginning (KB/sec) | 81900 |
87300 |
86733 |
83113 |
| End (KB/sec) | 52233 |
52400 |
52400 |
52200 |
|
| Disk Access Time (ms) | 15.3 |
15.16 |
15.26 |
15.68 |
|
| Disk CPU Utilization (%) | 3.10 |
3.22 |
3.13 |
2.70 |
| |
Scores between the 7450 and 7410 again remain very similar. Is this an indication that R5 Fusion Technology is nothing but marketing? Seems unlikely - it would be foolish to draw any conclusions based solely on a card's sustained transfer rate, linear access time, and CPU usage during 4MB/sec sustained reads (yep, that's how WinBench measures CPU usage by default). Performance under various load levels and access patterns is what matters, so we'll look to IOMeter to give us a more detailed performance picture.
 IOMeter...
|
|
|
