Miscellaneous Aspects - RAID Rebuild and Daisy Chaining

While the Rugged Thunderbolt version had to be checked for TRIM support, the 2big Thunderbolt 2 had to be subjected to a RAID rebuild. Since the unit also uses an external power adapter, power consumption is also of interest. The LED behind the blue button on the front side of the unit serves as an indicator of the RAID status (amongst other things). The LaCie Desktop Manager also provides insights into the health of the array. We simulated drive loss by pulling out one of the disks during data transfer (the array was obviously configured in RAID 1). The hardware LED status immediately began flashing red. The monitoring program also reflected the degradation. Inserting the disk into a PC's SATA slot surprisingly showed the data preserved on the removed drive. This was a surprise, as we usually find disks subject to hardware RAID not being data-recovery-friendly in nature. The various aspects are covered in the gallery below.

After formatting the drive and putting it back in the 2big Thunderbolt 2's drive bay, RAID rebuild automatically started. Even though the Desktop Manager program doesn't display the progress of the rebuild, it does indicate whether the process is completed or not. The LED in the front panel also stops flashing red and blue after the rebuild is done.

We tracked various power consumption numbers (including the average power consumed during our robocopy tests - noted as 'benchmark mode' below). The collected data, as well as the inferred RAID rebuild duration (tracked by monitoring the power consumed at the wall) are presented in the table below.

LaCie 2big Thunderbolt 2 Power Consumption & RAID Rebuild
Activity Duration Avg. Power Consumption
    USB 3.0 Thunderbolt 2
       
Idle - 17.94 W 22.03 W
Disks Spun Down - 4.06 W 8.49 W
Benchmark Mode - 23.19 W 29.47 W
RAID-1 Rebuild 9h 51m 43s 23.85 W -

The 2big unit carries two Thunderbolt 2 ports in order to enable daisy chaining. The 20 Gbps bandwidth is quite helpful when one wants to maintain bandwidth while daisy-chaining a display (or another Thunderbolt peripheral). In order to test out the daisy chaining aspect, we just connected the Rugged Thunderbolt to the spare Thunderbolt 2 port on the 2big unit. We repeated our first performance benchmarks set in this configuration by evaluating data transfer between the two units (with the 2big Thunderbolt 2 in RAID 0).

LaCie 2big Thunderbolt 2 & Rugged Thunderbolt Daisy Chaining Performance
Workload Transfer Rate (MBps)
Read Target Rugged Thunderbolt 2big Thunderbolt 2
Write Target 2big Thunderbolt 2 Rugged Thunderbolt
     
Photos 222.88 282.22
Videos 223.34 298.17
Blu-ray Folder 263.18 334.57

Given that the Rugged's Thunderbolt cable is permanently attached to the unit, the accessibility factor also plays an important role in this common use-case - data transfer can be achieved at Thunderbolt speeds between the on-field unit and the desktop unit meant for the processing workflow without hunting around on the server / workstation for a physical Thunderbolt port.

Performance Evaluation - Rugged Thunderbolt Concluding Remarks
Comments Locked

42 Comments

View All Comments

  • Kevin G - Wednesday, July 9, 2014 - link

    Thunderbolt has its niche of being a means to host PCIe devices externally. For laptops, this is a pretty nice feature but for systems like the Mac Pro, it doesn't make sense when internal PCIe could have been an option. The other catch is that the one specific devices users would like to connect via Thunderbolt is not officially supported: GPUs.
  • AlValentyn - Wednesday, July 9, 2014 - link

    What it tells me is that TB over an add-on card with Windows is slow. Not that TB is slower than USB. That's false statement as TB2 is 20Gb/s, while USB3.0 is 5Gb/s.

    You don't see USB3 driving 60Hz 4K displays, or getting over 800MB/s on RAIDs, and SSDs.

    I'm surprised they didn't even bother with OSX, and Mac with built in Thunderbolt as well.
  • Shadowself - Wednesday, July 9, 2014 - link

    Exactly.

    Even with the multi-hop (and hacked BIOS) TB2 is only 3% slower in RAID 0 mode. I suspect the greater *apparent* advantage USB 3.0 has over TB2 in RAID 1 mode has to do much, much more with LaCie's implementation of the hardware raid and translation from USB to RAID 1 versus translation from TB2 to RAID 1. Since RAID 0 is definitely more bandwidth hungry (given *zero* other bottlenecks through the entire system) then there should be no reason why TB2 is significantly slower at RAID 1 versus RAID 0. Ganesh should have caught this.

    To really test TB2 versus USB 3.0 for any external device, the test setup must include native implementations of both TB2 and USB 3.0 or else the results are hopelessly tainted.
  • ganeshts - Wednesday, July 9, 2014 - link

    This review is meant to address what a Windows user looking to get on the Thunderbolt bandwagon should expect.

    I stand by my conclusions: For 2-bay devices with no daisy chaining requirements, USB 3.0 is better than Thunderbolt for Windows users. When it comes to 5 bays, things may be different.
  • casperes1996 - Thursday, July 10, 2014 - link

    With all due respect, the review was of the drives though. Not the drives (for Windows). I read the review as a Mac user, wanting to know the performance over TB. TRIM over TB on the Mac is also something I am now quite curious about.

    Would it be possible to perhaps get another review, or an addendum to this one, testing the drive on a Mac?

    The review was fine for what it was, but I think we are many curious about the Mac side, as it is where Thunderbolt is more proliferated.
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, July 11, 2014 - link

    Thunderbolt in Windows isn't any different from Thunderbolt in a Mac. It's the same protocol with the same performance. The only difference is that in a Mac Thunderbolt is "invisible" to the end-user because Apple's EFI is locked and the drivers come with the OS, whereas in Windows you can play with some settings in BIOS and the drivers need to be installed manually.

    Testing these drives in a Mac wouldn't give any different results. Like I mentioned earlier, I have the same add-on card and have been able to reach speeds of over 700MB/s with a TB1 device, so the bottleneck in these LaCie drives is elsewhere.
  • repoman27 - Friday, July 11, 2014 - link

    I'm not going to argue that you should have tested with a Mac, and I can fully understand why Anandtech would stick with a Windows based testbed for DAS devices to make results comparable (and Ganesh doesn't currently have a Mac). But saying that Thunderbolt device performance is the same under both Mac OS X and Windows is like saying that games should perform the same on both OSes, or that you get the same performance and battery life from a Mac whether you run Windows or Mac OS X.

    At just a very base level, Apple's EFI implementation may offer performance benefits over Microsoft's hybrid UEFI / Windows software stack model. Also, each OEM's hardware implementation can have performance implications. Most Macs use PCIe lanes provided by the CPU, not the PCH. Since there's apparently a requirement for add-in cards to use the PCH lanes, they're inherently at a disadvantage. Even more so in real-world scenarios when using a board that has 5 PCIe switches on the PCH lanes alone resulting in a brutally oversubscribed DMI connection.

    Thunderbolt essentially looks like nothing more than a PCIe switch to the OS, which doesn't require any special drivers at all. The Thunderbolt "driver" is all about supporting PCIe hot-plugging, tolerating up to 9 µs of round-trip latency, and enforcing Intel's licensing agreements. What you do need to worry about is the drivers for the PCIe based controllers in any device you connect. This is obviously the same whether it is a PCIe add-in card or external Thunderbolt device, and no different under Windows or Mac OS X. The most glaring omission in this article is not reporting which host controllers are in the devices and what drivers were being used for testing. As readers we have no idea whether the Thunderbolt tests were performed using Microsoft or Marvell (or whoever's) SATA host controller drivers, whether AHCI was enabled, or whether the TRIM support issue was a result of the drivers being used. On the USB side, we can only infer that a native Intel USB 3.0 port was used (since the Asmedia controller was disabled in order to provide a PCIe x4 connection for the Thunderbolt add-in card) with whatever the current version is of the Microsoft driver under Windows 8.1 Pro, and UASP was supported by both drives. These types of details really need to be presented along with the other data to live up to the Anandtech ethos. I don't just want a quick benchmark; I want to understand the underlying limitations and how they factor into the results, and to see the hardware pushed as far as it can go.
  • Teo_ - Tuesday, August 12, 2014 - link

    The first review I can find on a quick search based on a Mac reports sequential read and write speed in RAID 0 412.7MB/s and 353.3MB/s, so I’m curious too to see the same sample folders and tasks tested on a Mac.
  • GTVic - Friday, July 11, 2014 - link

    Thunderbolt is misunderstood, there is no "translation to TB2" it is an extension of the PCI Express Bus and also supports Display Port.
  • Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, July 9, 2014 - link

    I think the performance is limited by the ASMedia chips (SATA & SATA to PCIe/TB bridge). I have the same add-on card as Ganesh and have been able to achieve speeds of around 700MB/s (this is with TB1). I'm getting a proper TB2 device soon, so stay tuned for a more thorough review of the add-on card (as well as more Thunderbolt stuff).

    As for OS X, as far as I know Ganesh does not have a Mac with Thunderbolt (and neither do I). Just because we don't test with something doesn't mean that it's due to our laziness -- Apple doesn't send review samples around like e.g. ASUS does so we would have to spend our own money to get one for testing.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now