Surveillance Hard Drive Shoot-Out: WD And Seagate Square Off
Video surveillance has been around for years. Grainy gas station cameras are giving way to higher-end 1080p-capable IP cameras, and storage is evolving to meet the needs of these ever-expanding solutions. Today we look at two new entries into the market.
Results: WD Surveillance Benchmark, Read Completion
The WD Surveillance Benchmark also displays histograms of the read and write completion times. When you start to stress the drives, writes take priority over the read operations, and their completion times start to drift upwards. This is what you want to see; if you have to drop data, you'd rather lose information played back than the stream you're trying to record. For all drives, write completions were always less than 20 ms.
In the graph above, we are looking solely at read completions times.
In the first test case, all products perform well. Everything except the WD Red has 50% of its read commands complete in less than 20 ms. Moving to the more demanding test cases proves to be problematic for the non-enterprise drives.
The Seagate Surveillance HDD has slightly better read distributions than WD's Purple, and in the next section, we'll see how the actual distribution looks for both disks.
Looking at the enterprise drives, you can see that they are better equipped to handle more demanding workloads. In fact, the Seagate Savvio 15K.3 just plows through the tests. Even though the idle time for the 32/720p/30 FPS lands at 9%, almost 100% of the writes and reads are still under 20 ms.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Current page: Results: WD Surveillance Benchmark, Read Completion
Prev Page Results: WD Surveillance Benchmark, Idle Time Next Page Results: WD Surveillance Benchmark, Distributions-
coolestcarl Excellent article. I was doing research into building a custom surveillance system for our shop and this is exactly the kind of material that would help me make an informed decision.Reply -
coolestcarl One thing that was unclear... obviously WD recommends no more than 8 in a system because of the lack of RAFF. I was wondering:Reply
Are there any demonstrable effects on performance of having these drives in a small external raid array (of perhaps 4 drives)? -
AndrewJacksonZA "As I noted earlier, those Seagate models are in there as a performance reference; they wouldn't normally compete in the same space as the Purple and Surveillance HDD."Reply
If you're going to wander into the USD1/GB+ territory, even just for informational purposes, please include an SSD in this mix to be fair. SSD performance/price just might validate people buying them for surveillance drives.
Thank you. -
InvalidError I would have whacked a WD Black in there to see how all these specialty drives compare against a standard performance-oriented desktop drive.Reply -
mapesdhs I would have whacked a WD Black in there to see how all these specialty drives compare against a standard performance-oriented desktop drive.
Indeed, or any typical Enterprise SATA model (Hitachi HUS, Seagate ES2/NS, etc.)
Come to think of it, given the consequences of not being able to identify a suspect or
obtain other relevant visual information due to dropped data, as AndrewJacksonZA
says it would be interesting to know how these drives compare to various high-capacity
SSHDs/SSDs, eg. the Seagate 4TB ST4000DX001, Samsung 840 EVO 1TB (which includes
AES), and (high-density option, power saving) the Samsung MZ-MTE1T0BW 1TB mSATA.
The higher cost/GB of these products is surely more than worth it given the intended task.
Ian.
-
CaedenV Great article! I had no idea at just how huge the performance gap was between the cheap consumer drives and their more industrial cousins in the enterprise market. Have to say though; with enterprise SSDs starting to come down in price with such better specs, it is going to be difficult to justify enterprise hard drives that still cost $1+/GB. I think we are going to see SSD adoption grow like crazy in those enterprise markets the next few years, especially with drives starting to have 5-10 year warranties.Reply
Article idea: No offence to the writers at Tom's but this is the first interesting article I have read in a long time. Could we get some more articles like this? Maybe some articles comparing onboard Intel RAID with different popular card options? Or comparing how different drives perform in different RAID configurations and workloads? I get the feeling that these drives would perform quite differently as they are really made to work as a team rather than as solo drives. -
InvalidError
You would need one grossly under-engineered surveillance system for this to really be a problem since there is nothing happening 99% of the time and those drops would need to conveniently happen during the 1% of the time where you need data and your system administrator would need to have somehow failed to notice and fix the issues in-between events if they were so bad as to render the system unusable for its intended purpose.13537984 said:Come to think of it, given the consequences of not being able to identify a suspect or obtain other relevant visual information due to dropped data
Most of the time though, surveillance recordings are merely a nice convenience in case something goes wrong but are not considered critical outside of casinos, banks and few other (very) high security applications that have their own IT departments or dedicated vendors working on their video archival needs and are unlikely to take their hardware recommendations from enthusiast sites like THG.
I doubt any normal company would waste SSDs or 10k/12k/15k RPM HDDs on video surveillance storage. They would be more likely to use standard HDDs like WD Black / Red / Green / Blue. -
Amdlova seagate in enterprise sector is better than WD. i See these little boys working on a PC and DO such amazing job. Running windows and a old Surveillance card with 32 cameras and you can see the videos and edit at same time.Reply -
drewriley 13537984 said:Come to think of it, given the consequences of not being able to identify a suspect or
obtain other relevant visual information due to dropped data, as AndrewJacksonZA
says it would be interesting to know how these drives compare to various high-capacity
SSHDs/SSDs, eg. the Seagate 4TB ST4000DX001, Samsung 840 EVO 1TB (which includes
AES), and (high-density option, power saving) the Samsung MZ-MTE1T0BW 1TB mSATA.
The higher cost/GB of these products is surely more than worth it given the intended task.
Ian.
I really debated on whether to include SSDs in the evaluation. The problem is that because of $/GB and write endurance, it would only make sense to use them on a smaller scale setup, which is where their benefits (simultaneous high speed IO), are greatly reduced. Also, their performance would skew the graphs to the point where it would be hard to interpret the results of the HDDs.