SR posts Fujitsu MAU numbers

[Pariah]

SCSI is king again, no if's and's or but's about it. For single user benchmarks, the MAU blew by the competition in all 4 tests by a wide margin. This certainly generates more evidence that there is something wrong with the Seagate 15k.4 that SR tested.


Fujitsu MAU vs 15k.4 vs 74GB Raptor

 

[jose]

How does it compare to the Maxtor Atlas 15kII ??

Regards,
Jose

 

[wfn]

pwned!

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: jose
How does it compare to the Maxtor Atlas 15kII ??

Regards,
Jose

Don't know, SR doesn't have numbers posted yet, but the Atlas 15K II posts better lowlevel results (5.4ms access vs 5.7ms and 88MB/s average STR vs 78MB/s), which doesn't always accurately predict highlevel results, but is a good sign that it should be at least in the same ballpark as the Fujitsu.

 

[Zepper]

Did you notice that that is a chart from 2001???
.bh.

:moon:

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: Zepper
Did you notice that that is a chart from 2001???
.bh.

:moon:

The application that generates the chart is from 2001.

 

[sharkeeper]

SCSI is king again? It was always the king...

Anyways, this drive appears to have been balanced between MU and DT use. I sure hope that doesn't affect tru MU performance with an intelligent HBA.

Should still scale nicely in 12 and 16 drive arrays.

They compared it to a Raptor. LOL, that's like putting a Camaro and 911 together on the track.

Cheers!

 

[fkloster]

Originally posted by: sharkeeper
SCSI is king again? It was always the king...

Anyways, this drive appears to have been balanced between MU and DT use. I sure hope that doesn't affect tru MU performance with an intelligent HBA.

Should still scale nicely in 12 and 16 drive arrays.

They compared it to a Raptor. LOL, that's like putting a Camaro and 911 together on the track.

Cheers!

lol obviously shark has not seen my '67 camaro...

:Q

 

[sharkeeper]

lol obviously shark has not seen my '67 camaro...

Ok, let's just say a stock 97 F body 350 TPI and stock 993-911 TT.

I've driven both so the comparison IS valid.

I know "Camaro" is too vague because it could mean this or this.

Cheers!

 

[fkloster]

(drooling on the 993-911) have you seen the new 05' speedster?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: sharkeeper
SCSI is king again? It was always the king...

They compared it to a Raptor. LOL, that's like putting a Camaro and 911 together on the track.

1) Storage Review didn't do that as far as I can tell, Pariah compared the 3 drives. So blame him.

2) Storage Review has a wide array of people who use their ratings. Yes, pitting a Raptor against any newer SCSI on server benchmarks is like putting a Camaro and a 911 together on the track. But many, many people who visit Storage Review will never have a server or anything that resembles server usage. Thus for the home enthusiast who wants the best gaming performance, SCSI vs Raptor is a very valid comparison. Gaming benchmark. Notice that just about the only drives beating the Raptor are newer than the Raptor. The Raptor beats the previous Cheetah 15K.3 king. Thus it is a very valid comparison for many users.

3) SCSI was always king for server use. But not necessarilly for the other benchmarks. Looking at the other benchmarks now, the MAU is king, but I can't say that any other SCSI drive will blow away the Raptor. Yes some of the other drives are faster, but not dramatically.


I have a quesiton for Pariah. I have no problem with SR still using old business software since most people and most businesses use old business software. But what about the other applications? Have you heard if they have plans to update their benchmarks any time soon?

 

[sharkeeper]

(drooling on the 993-911) have you seen the new 05' speedster?

Yep.

Cheers!

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: fkloster
(drooling on the 993-911) have you seen the new 05' speedster?

Aw man, that's bad, at first I read 993 as 939 and was wondering WTF 911 was when talking about S939

 

[Pariah]

I picked those 3 drives since the Fujitsu is what this post was about to begin with, the 15k.4 #'s were just posted as well, and weren't really any good, which became very obvious with the Fujitsu numbers, and because the Raptor has been considered the fastest single user drive among enthusiasts since its release. So the comparison is between the old leader the new leader, and showing how big the gap is, and the should have been better, but something looks wrong with it Seagate.

When the drives were released is irrlevant. Who's ever fastest is fastest, there is no release date limit. The same could have been said of the Raptor which was released 1 and 1/2 to 2 years after the SCSI drives it was competing against.

The server benchmarks are also largely irrelevant to the users here so I didn't mention them. We all know SCSI kicks the crap out of ATA in server benchmarks anyway, no need to rehash that one.

SR is in the process of putting together testbed 4, and was even asking for help locating a motherboard recently (none fit all the criteria though), so I would assume there will be an update to the benchmark suite as well.

 

[bacillus]

Just my luck! Having just purchased a Fujitsu MAS model I find it's being superseded by a faster model.

 

[Zepper]

Actually SR should retain the old office application benchmark so that all drive tests can be compared. If they want a newer test, it should be ADDED not Substituted...
.bh.

:moon: Darn it gets dark early now...

 

[XeonTux]

OMG I was waiting for them to review this drive, I knew it was going to kick some serious ass. Waaaay out of my price range tho. I'm happy with my <$100 36GB 15K.3 refurb.

 

[tbooth]

I cant seem to find pricing/availability info for the MAU series anywhere, anyone know? I imagine the prices will be similar to the MAS series, but I'd like to know for sure.