Test Details, Test Setup and Comparison Table
Test Details
We ran several benchmarks for storage testing, including c’t Magazine’s h2benchw benchmark for throughput testing and Iometer for I/O performance. However, we decided to add a few more tests that reflect everyday usage, so we created batch scripts that copy a certain number of JPEGs, MP3s, and small text files. We tested read and write speeds and used Microsoft’s Robocopy utility, which comes with Windows Vista and 7. Last but not least, we used IOMeter to test average combined throughput if the drives have to read and write concurrently.
Copy Workloads:
Images (JPEG and RAW files), 2.01 GB (2,167,562,240 bytes), 790 files, 1 folder
Music (MP3 and WAV files), 2.00 GB (2,149,851,136 bytes), 356 files, 33 folders
Small files (TXT, XLS, DOC files), 395 MB (414,482,432 bytes), 22,704 files, 2,167 folders
We used an IODrive from FusionIO to avoid any bottlenecks in the copy testing.
Test Setup
| System Hardware | |
|---|---|
| Hardware | Details |
| CPU | Intel Core i7-920 (45 nm, 2.66 GHz, 8MB Shared L3 Cache) |
| Motherboard (Socket 1366) | Supermicro X8SAX, Revision: 1.0, Chipset Intel X58 + ICH10R, BIOS: 1.0B |
| RAM | 3 x 1GB DDR3-1333 Corsair CM3X1024-1333C9DHX |
| HDD | Seagate NL35 400 GB, ST3400832NS, 7200 RPM, SATA 1.5Gb/s, 8 MB Cache |
| Storage Controllers | eSATA: on-board eSATA (ICH10R) USB 2.0: on-board USB 2.0 (ICH10R) USB 3.0: NEC D720200F1 (Gigabyte GA-USB3.0) |
| Power Supply | OCZ EliteXstream 800 W, OCZ800EXS-EU |
| Benchmarks | |
| Performance Measurements | h2benchw 3.13 |
| I/O Performance | Iometer 2008.08.18 Fileserver-Benchmark Webserver-Benchmark Database-Benchmark Workstation-Benchmark Streaming Reads and Writes |
| System software & Drivers | |
| Operating System | Windows 7 Ultimate |
| Manufacturer | A-Data | Buffalo | Western Digital |
|---|---|---|---|
| Family | Nobility Series | HD-PEU3 | My Book 3.0 |
| Model Number | NH01 | HD-PE500U3 | WDBABP0010HCH |
| Capacity | 500 GB | 500 GB | 1000 GB |
| Other Capacities | 320 GB, 640 GB | 640 GB | 2000 GB |
| Form Factor | 2.5" | 2.5" | 3.5" |
| Interface | USB 3.0 | USB 3.0 | USB 3.0 |
| Weight | 194 g | 182 g | 900 g |
Latest External Storage News
- 09/02 – Laser Heat Used to Make HDD Write Transfers Faster
- 02/02 – Seagate Quietly Intros GoFlex Thunderbolt Adapter
- 02/02 – Seagate Believes HDD Supply Disruption to Continue in 2012
- 28/01 – Cleversafe Announces 10 Exabyte Storage System Configuration
- 26/01 – Western Digital Intros My Book Thunderbolt Duo Drive
Latest External Storage reviews
- 10/11 – Round-Up: 15 microSDHC Cards, Benchmarked And Reviewed
- 25/05 – Qnap TS-559 Pro+: Familiar Network Storage With A New CPU
- 24/05 – 10 SDXC/SDHC Memory Cards, Rounded Up And Benchmarked
- 18/05 – Is Data Encryption Worth Destroying Your NAS' Performance?
- 26/04 – Nine USB 3.0 Flash Drives For Road Warriors
Be warned - I got the WD usb 3 a couple of months ago and was warned that if anything goes wrong your data is pretty much gone as the HD and housing are a bespoke design. Looking at the usb connector (also a WD only design)on the housing I felt it looked a little flimsy... guess what happened last week? When moving the HD the female USB socket connection inside the housing broke and came out when I took out the USB cable. Had to have the entire thing shipped back to WD to be repaired - they said they couldn't reattach it and that I had mishandled it. End of story lost all my data and now out of pocket for one very expensive HD :-( If you get one be very careful moving it when the cables are plugged in, its size, weight, need for separate power and flimsy connectors mean that it probably not the best 'portable' HD. Performance wise when transferring large continuous files (ISOs etc) it was bloody fast, but for folders with lots of smaller files the speed dropped dramatically as can been seen in the test results. So now looking for a replacement, will have to go back to the article to pick the best alternative.