2x X25-V vs. everything else review.....

[One_Hertz]

why would you say that?
is your drive not at the top?

Because 2x X25-V in R0 can not be near 2x faster than a single X25-M. They should be faster, but not 2x, which is absurd.

As soon as I see a large inconsistency like that, the whole benchmark loses validity in my mind.

Edit: to expand, the numbers don't make any sense. Specifically on the heavy trace. A lot of what they do is dependent on sequential writes, which is why we see drives high in that attribute near the top. The X25-M does poorly in comparison to other MLCs that do offer high seq writes, which makes sense. However, the fact that their 80MB/s write speed raid is suddenly 2x faster than a single X25-M which is also 80MB/s makes zero sense whatsoever. The extra read speed of the raid should help, but nowhere near 2x. They either messed something up in this particular benchmark or the whole thing is crap.

Edit2: to expand further, comparing both setups:

Seq read - 370 vs 255
Seq write - 80 vs 80
4kb r write - 60 vs 40
4kb r read - 60 vs 60

The controllers they are using (X25-V and X25-M) are very similar so the speed of reading + writing at once (also very important for the heavy trace, in fact this is why X25-E is the top drive) should be similar.

With that in mind, it does not follow that their trace should spit out 2x higher numbers in favor of the RAID. I would think around 25% higher would be appropriate.