Real World Tests - Multitasking Performance

To provide a real world example of multitasking we use run Outlook and import 450MB of emails into an account. We then time how long it takes our benchmarking utlity to zip a single 300MB file. To compare our results we calculate the difference between the multitasked process and the single task file zip process.

Outlook + File Zip 1 300MB File
NCQ/TCQ Status
Multitasked
File Zip Only
% Difference
Hitachi T7K250
w/out NCQ
76.543
67.057
12.39%
w/NCQ
79.815
65.641
21.6%
Samsung HD160JJ
w/out NCQ
71.484
58.805
21.6%
w/NCQ
73.554
61.068
20.4%
Western Digital WD1600JS
N/A
74.371
61.182
21.6%

Very disappointing. Hitachi's T7K250 performed better than the rest in this real world multitasking test...with NCQ turned off! Now, drive manufacturers list NCQ as a native feature, but it does not seem to work too well in real world situations. As we look at products in the future, we hope to see atleast some improvement given by Native Command Queuing.

Multitasking Performance - Business Winstone 2004 Thermal and Acoustics
Comments Locked

52 Comments

View All Comments

  • fbottone - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    Hows about adding a Maxtor SATAII (like Maxline III 300GB) drive to the mix? The SATA-I maxtors do pretty well in certain tests but I'd like to see them compared with the three very good drives already there.
  • BornStar18 - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    I'm confused by your conclusion on page 5 regarding Office Productivity. Your written statement doesn't support what I'm looking at in the graph. Does the text not refer to graph?
  • 100proof - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    Would it be possible to get an update to this review showcasing some of the real benefits of SATA II?

    It seems pointless to test these drives individually as it's fairly obvious drives set at the 7200rpm speed will not improve much for indivdual performance.. Raid Arrays are necessary to guage how much of a performance boost the added bw of SATA300 factors into results. It would also be nice to see comparisons of these new SATA II drives in raid set against similar setups of SATA 150/ATA raid arrays. This might be asking too much though...
  • olly - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    When you select "Print this article", page 3 onwards the font is too big.
  • Svenna - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    There is actually no good SATA NCQ conrollers around for the for the amd platform, yet. IMO only the new AHCI controller would be worth testing ncq on :(
  • Aenslead - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    bah... what a fiasco.
  • Googer - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    I think this says it all, Raptors are almost extinct. They need to be updated or they will die.

    The performance they show is poor when compaired to the latest 7200 drives.
  • greekfragma - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    couldnt agree more with zax7480.

    gyuz can u tell us what was wrong with nvidia driver package 6.54 and u tested with a driver that was publiced one year ago ?

    plus i like your comment at final words of the article
    '' In time, however, we should see improvements in drivers to help reach the true potentials for the new SATA standard.''

    thumbs down for this review
  • jax7480 - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    I would like to know the reason that make them install such and OLD driver for the Nvidia chipset. Driver 6.39 was released February 2004. This was the first chipset driver for Nforce 4. It was released together with Nforce 4 chipset.
    Couldn't they just DOWNLOAD a newer one? We are talking about NEW HDD drives here.
  • cryptonomicon - Sunday, June 26, 2005 - link

    hmm, i liked this review alot because i can see the performance of alot of common drives on the market today and see their performance in comparison to each other, regardless to what SATA2 is doing.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now