Iometer Results
Website:
Iometer
Iometer is a powerful open source synthetic benchmarking tool, able to simulate the effects of a wide variety of software loads and circumstances on either individual hard disk drives and complete drive arrays. In the past we've chosen not to include it due to
bit-tech's traditional preference towards real world benchmarks. However, to correctly check for drive stutter caused by extremely high random write latencies there aren't a great deal of options, so we've finally decided to include Iometer in our hard disk testing suite.
For our Iometer testing we used a 4GB portion of the drive and subjected it to random read or write commands or both, depending on the test, of 4KB, with three outstanding I/Os to simulate high level multi-tasking. We ran this each test for two minutes, repeating three times to ensure we recorded an accurate result.
As the differences in read and write latencies and speeds can be so pronounced, we've also included tables of information where appropriate, to help make understanding the random read/write performance differences between different SSDs and conventional hard disk drives easier.
-
OCZ Vertex 120GB v.1.3
-
Corsair P256 256GB SSD
-
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
-
Seagate 7200.11 1.5TB
-
Samsung SpinPoint F1 1TB
-
Western Digital 2TB Caviar Black
-
Seagate 1TB 7200.12
-
Samsung EcoGreen F2 1.5TB
-
9.63
-
4.67
-
1.75
-
1.20
-
1.01
-
0.95
-
0.84
-
0.65
MB/s (higher is better)
-
OCZ Vertex 120GB v1.3
-
Corsair P256 256GB SSD
-
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
-
Seagate 7200.11 1.5TB
-
Western Digital 2TB Caviar Black
-
Samsung SpinPoint F1 1TB
-
Seagate 1TB 7200.12
-
Samsung EcoGreen F2 1.5TB
-
1.16
-
2.50
-
6.70
-
9.70
-
11.28
-
11.55
-
13.88
-
18.15
time (milliseconds) - less is better
-
OCZ Vertex 120GB v1.3
-
Corsair P256 256GB SSD
-
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB
-
Samsung SpinPoint F1 1TB
-
Seagate 1TB 7200.12
-
Western Digital 2TB Caviar Black
-
Seagate 7200.11 1.5TB
-
Samsung EcoGreen F2 1.5TB
-
10.46
-
18.60
-
20.56
-
33.31
-
69.69
-
93.18
-
101.00
-
123.52
time (milliseconds) - less is better
For analysis of these results, please see the
Results Analysis page.
Want to comment? Please log in.