It is my opinion that benchmarks should be done with a real benchmark tool.
Try with bonnie++ This will really show you the strengths and weaknesses of your setup. Good luck, Simon On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann < volkerar...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Am Donnerstag 11 August 2011, 10:30:04 schrieb Mark Knecht: > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Grant <emailgr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm testing this USB 3.0 bus-powered hard drive: > > > > > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041OSQ9S > > > > > > and I get: > > > > > > # hdparm -tT /dev/sdb > > > /dev/sdb: > > > Timing cached reads: 8006 MB in 2.00 seconds = 4004.33 MB/sec > > > Timing buffered disk reads: 252 MB in 3.01 seconds = 83.63 MB/sec > > > > > > # hdparm -tT /dev/sdb > > > /dev/sdb: > > > Timing cached reads: 8230 MB in 2.00 seconds = 4116.54 MB/sec > > > Timing buffered disk reads: 252 MB in 3.02 seconds = 83.55 MB/sec > > > > > > # hdparm -tT /dev/sdb > > > /dev/sdb: > > > Timing cached reads: 8446 MB in 2.00 seconds = 4224.36 MB/sec > > > Timing buffered disk reads: 230 MB in 3.02 seconds = 76.28 MB/sec > > > > > > Wikipedia says USB 3.0 has transmission speeds of up to 5 Gbit/s. > > > Doesn't MB/sec denote mega*bytes* per second? > > > > > > - Grant > > > > 4000MB/s = 4Gb/s > > > please read man hdparm > > -T Perform timings of cache reads for benchmark and comparison > purposes. > For meaningful results, this operation > should be repeated 2-3 times on an otherwise inactive system > (no > other active processes) with at least a couple > of megabytes of free memory. This displays the speed of > reading > directly from the Linux buffer cache without > disk access. This measurement is essentially an indication of > the throughput of the processor, cache, and mem- > ory of the system under test. > > > as you can see, those numbers have nothing to do with the transport. > > And 80mb/sec for a harddisk is really, really good. > > -- > #163933 > >
