Page 8 - Benchmark: PassMark PerformanceTest 10
About PassMark PerformanceTest 10
This Advanced Disk Test, which is part of PerformanceTest, measures the data transfer speed when reading or writing data to one or more disks. The speed that data can be transferred between memory and a hard disk drive is one of a system's most important performance aspects. There are quite a few factors which have a bearing on this speed and the Advanced Disk Drive Test allows the user to vary most of these factors and compare the results.
The test supports any drive that can be mounted under Windows. Including IDE drives, SCSI, RAID, USB key drives, SATA, networked shared drives and external drives.
Users have the ability to test multiple drives at the same time using multiple threads, and specify:
- The size of the test file used. Larger files mean that the system cache has less of an effect on the test types, which use caching (see below).
- The size of the data block used for each read or write request. Larger blocks mean less requests and can lead to an improvement in performance.
- The choice of four access methods - C/C++ API, Win32 API cached / uncached and raw disk access.
- Sequential or random access (seeking plus reading and writing)
- Synchronous and Asynchronous access
- The split between reading and writing
The results of all completed tests may be graphed using our custom graphing components.
From: Developer's Page
PassMark PerformanceTest 10's Advanced Disk Test, unlike HD Tune Pro 5.70, generates some awesome graphs right out of the box. It also provides valuable insight in simulating real-world performance applications. To make things clear to you, the first graph simulates a database server, followed by a file server, web server, and workstation. Obviously, PassMark PerformanceTest 10 uses highly compressible data in most tests some controllers can really take advantage of. However, it also requires high IOPS capabilities for the best score. The Lexar NQ100 480GB provided many output graphs that were not very flat, which is not great if you are looking for consistent performance.
The performance results were acceptable in most areas with one glaring exception that will be discussed shortly. With results of 33.67MB/s, 89.61MB/s, 448.64MB/s, and 68.65MB/s, these numbers revealed the budget nature of the Lexar NQ100 480GB. In most simulations, it did better than the Patriot P200 512GB, which provided results of 18.84MB/s, 142.98MB/s, 407.72MB/s, and 65.94MB/s, respectively. It also held its own against the Crucial BX500 480GB, which came in at 23.93MB/s, 152.34MB/s, 394.95MB/s, and 58.10MB/s, respectively. However, the NQ100 480GB did not perform as well against the Crucial MX500 500GB, which posted results of 155.76MB/s, 434.76MB/s, 488.07MB/s, and 73.11MB/s, respectively. While the NQ100 480GB managed to come out on top for the web server and workstation simulations, these scores were ultimately very close. In the database server and file server tests, the MX500 500GB overcame the NQ100 480GB by a large margin. In both comparisons, the Lexar NQ100 480GB had very weak performance when it came to the file server simulation, with a score that fell far behind the other two drives and only beat the BX500 480GB.
Page Index
1. Introduction, Packaging, Specifications
2. A Closer Look, Test System
3. Benchmark: AIDA64 Disk Benchmark
4. Benchmark: ATTO Disk Benchmark
5. Benchmark: Crystal Disk Mark 8.0
6. Benchmark: HD Tach 3.0.1.0
7. Benchmark: HD Tune Pro 5.70
8. Benchmark: PassMark PerformanceTest 10
9. Benchmark: PCMark 10
10. Conclusion
