LSI 9260 DRIVER
Not to be confused with ordinary 2. Samsung ZET Review. This presents a more realistic look of what to expect performance-wise between the 3. This is a very small difference but nonetheless, it exists and is significant because there is no difference for the other setups. In part one of this review , we looked at the feasibility of buying this RAID card to get 6.
|Date Added:||18 December 2014|
|File Size:||33.52 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This next set of benchmarks are for random reads and writes. Additionally, both cards use a PCI-express 2.
Our real-world benchmarks provide the best indication of what to expect from these drives in actual usage scenarios. Not to be confused with ordinary 2. It is unknown at this point, however, whether this difference will also be apparent with hard drives.
These drives are optimized for server-style loads, especially ones involving multiple requests. This is not an unexpected result given hard drives, even the ultra high-performance Seagate Savvio enterprise drives we used for testing can’t take full advantage of 3. The drive is available in GB and GB capacities.
LSI 9260-8i 512mb PCIe 8 Port SAS SATA 6gb/s LP MegaRAID Controller Lsi00202
To date we have not tested a platter-based drive that was able to consistently saturate SATA 3. We benchmarked the Seagate Savvio 10K. ,si i is the faster of the two, offering a faster processor and cache speed. Given the low data transfer rate, it is unlikely this is a result of the 3.
LSI i mb PCIe 8 Port SAS SATA 6gb/s LP MegaRAID Controller Lsi | eBay
For all intents and purposes this test shows drive performance under normal daily activity for most users. RAID1 is much slower on both reads 960 writes since data is not striped across one or more drives.
Our last real-life test covers disk activity in a productivity scenario. Something osi interesting is happening in this set of benchmarks however; notice how the 6. We can see generally identical performance across all of the RAID configurations between 3.
If you plan on sticking with hard drives for the long haul, it is probably not a wise financial decision to upgrade to a 6.
Today we will investigate the difference using fourth-generation Seagate Savvio 10K. The one interesting takeaway from this benchmark is the difference in read speeds between the 3. On the flip side, notice the RAID1 3.
In this test we include: Given we are using the same hard drives for all the benchmarks, the differences you see are a direct result of the RAID configurations and the RAID cards. All of the results show essentially no difference on each of the RAID levels, regardless of 3.
Last but not least, productivity is an identical story; there is no credible performance difference between the 3. Both support the same Sli levels.
We are seeing some discrepancies with the RAID0 3. In this trace we recorded MB being written to the drive and 7,MB being read. The RAID1 setups differ slightly in performance, however; 6.
Our gaming benchmark focuses on the read performance of the drives. In part two, we investigate whether 6. There is zero performance difference between the 3. In this trace we recorded 4,MB being written to the drive and 2,MB being read. In this read performance-focused test, the RAID5 setups come out on top. Samsung ZET Review.
In this trace we recorded 2,MB being written to the drive and 1,MB being read.