Winbench 99 2
.0 Business Disk Winmark Test Results">
At first, we thought something was wrong with the Seagate drive. We double-checked DMA settings, and everything seemed correct, but the Barracuda V ATA got a Business Disk Winmark score almost half that of the nearest competitor. However, the Seagate drive had a few interesting surprises up its sleeve as well soon see. At the other end of the performance envelope, the DiamondMax Plus 9 outpaced the nearest competitor, the IBM Deskstar 180GXP. Note that even the slowest drive here still ekes out a small lead over last years fastest drive.
WinBench 99 2.0 High End Disk Winmark Test Results
Again, the Barracuda V ATA trailed the pack, though the difference wasnt as substantial as it was with Business Disk Winmarks. Note that the IBM drive took the lead, with the Maxtor drive coming in second. Its also worth pointing out that the older Western Digital WD1000BB is the slowest by a significant margin.
The WinBench 99 high end disk tests can be broken down by application type. Lets look at a couple of them.
In the playback of a Microsoft C++ 5.0 compilation, the Barracuda actually places ahead of the Maxtor drive. Compilers are constantly reading and writing from the disk in small chunks, so perhaps the firmware in the Maxtor isnt optimized for this type of disk access.
This chart shows the results of a playback of a FrontPage 98 authoring session. The Seagate wins handily. Again, the pattern is one of relatively small reads and writes, alternating. Interestingly, this is the only subset test in which the older WD1000BB drive scored well.
In this case, Premiere reads large chunks of data into memory, then renders out to disk in steady streams. The Maxtor drive seems to like this type of disk access pattern better than the other drives.
One thing to keep in mind, though: weve heard rumblings from certain drive manufacturer technical reps, who prefer not to be identified, that their competitors actually detect popular benchmarks and tune their onboard caches to the benchmarks access patterns. However, given that the Seagate drives rated disk-to-buffer transfer rate, as supplied by the company, is lower than the competitions. This result turns out to be less surprising after all,