Best offers
|
My Passport Essential 500GB Portable... | $129.99 STAPLES More info |
|
My Book Essential Edition External... | $148.00 ServerSupply.com More info |
|
Caviar Black 1TB Hard Drive (Serial... | $91.99 Dell Small Business More info |
|
My Passport Essential Portable 320GB... | $134.00 ServerSupply.com More info |
|
X25-M Gen2 160GB 2.5" Solid State... | $513.99 CDW.com More info |
- external raid storage
- external raid controller
- 3ware 9650se review
- amcc 9650se sidecar
- 3ware 9650se benchmark
- 3ware sidecar
- raid 6 write performance
- raid storage solutions
- raid 6 performance degraded
- 3ware sidecar cable
- 3ware sidecar review
- iscsi raid 5
- hp external raid storage
- external raid 5 array
- raid 6 read performance
Partners
The Games selection
action :
Yoyo the Star
Yoyo is a young girl who recently graduated and dreams to become a movie star (don't we all). You'll have to guide her on the path to stardom,...
|
kids :
Bob
Throw bubbles so as to make the ones that appear in the game disappear. For this, use the Right / Left arrow keys to duck or move about, and the...
|
Sponsored links
- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (4) |
- Share
The 3Ware Sidecar specifically targets Apple users; this becomes obvious when reading the datasheet and also in looking at the device, because its design goes well next to an Apple Power Mac G5. Since it is based on eSATA, though, the Sidecar can also be used with PCs, and the RAID controller cards by AMCC/3Ware are PC and Mac compatible anyway.
Like Accusys, AMCC/3Ware runs hardware accelerated RAID, which is based on the 3Ware StorSwitch architecture instead of an Intel XOR accelerator. AMCC uses only 128 MB instead of 256 MB cache, and it does not support RAID 6 with double redundancy. Differences cannot be found in everyday operation and management, but on the performance side: while Accusys provides better throughput, the 3Ware solution offers between 10% and 70% higher I/O performance, depending on the I/O benchmark profile and command queue depth. The Sidecar with the 9650SE hence is predestined for server environments, where I/O performance is typically more important than throughput.
The read performance of the Sidecar is mostly on par with that of the Accusys iRAIDer, but 3Ware loses ground on write performance, where it is approximately 15% slower. Another issue to consider might be performance on degraded RAID 5 arrays: 3Ware is considerably slower in this area.
There also is another advantage of AMCC over Accusys: the controller card is more compact, and hence can also be installed into low-profile rackmount servers. Unfortunately, the three-year warranty only applies to the controller card; the Sidecar only has a one-year warranty.
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- E8500 vs X2 7750
- Need a server for data processing
- Dual Power Supply Setup
- Q6600 as a server, is it a good decision?
- Decided not to go ultra cheap, will this PS/Case work?
- From 680i P5N32-E SLI to790i Striker II Extreme
- RAID 0 on my P5W DH Deluxe, need some pointers
- Need Help! on new system build...
- Ready for my next upgrade please help!
- Separate PSU for additional fans?
- Which Asus MB for Q6600?
- Is my boared faulty?? and what boared should I get if so
- Asus p5W DeLuxe Intel 2 Quad 8Gb bios reports 3.2
- GA-G33M-S2H - blue screen when AHCI enabled
Related news
- Maxtos intros 500 GByte external network and media storage
- Oxford Semi intros SATA bridge chips for external storage
- CES 2007: Toshiba to debut external USB hard drive
- CeBIT 2008: Buffalo Unveils external Blu-ray/HD-DVD drive and HDTV Thin Client
- CES 2007: Asus shows off external graphics for notebooks
How does this compare to a DIY Linux Software RAID? Price? Performance? Reliability?
Unlike a hardware solution, if the controller card dies, you can forget about getting your data back since there is no "Standard" for RAID. On Linux you could just put the drives into another PC, as the meta-data for software RAID on Linux is not going to change across different versions of Linux.
Thanks for the article - you have convinced me not to even consider either of these.
RAID 10 should be faster than any individual drive for reads and writes, and it should also be faster than RAID 5.
Something is wrong here - either with the hardware or the tests.
Actually performance isn't capped at 1 cable. There are a number of solutions that have multiple connections using iscsi, some even route between the connections dynamically on the server side and you can bond the ethernet connections on the client side to achieve performance maxing out the quantity of connections on the client machine. Of the ones that we tested (day job) there were only a few that met performance needs. All the arrays max the cable(s) out with straight read/write, but the performance on a number of array's drops drastically when you staring hitting them with more clients (20+) for read/write scenarios. Of course, these solutions are only really useful if you have, say, 100K (or more. Alot more in some cases) lying around.
It's a crying shame that storage "solution" providers (and Tom's Hardware) don't look at the needs of the laptop marketshare. This would be just what I need, but the controller cards are deal-breakers.