2 ms·
Too much money is a function of how bad you want the performance. I have a Promise RAID attached to my MBP using TB, and it's really fast -- it makes firewire
by mturmon 14y ago
Too much money is a function of how bad you want the performance. I have a Promise RAID attached to my MBP using TB, and it's really fast -- it makes firewire 800 look unacceptably poky. It's been a long time since I measured throughput, but it's like a factor of 10. If you work with large datasets, it's a clear win.
- r00fus 14y agoHow does that compare, though to a raided SSD tied directly to the PCI board? I've been led to believe that 300k IOPS is possible using sub-$1000 gear from OCZ [1]. Combined with an agressive backup to spinning disk, this sounds like it'd scream like a monster and be stable to boot. [1] http://ocz.com/consumer/revodrive-3-x2-pcie-ssd http://ocz.com/consumer/revodrive-3-x2-pcie-ssd
- mturmon 14y agoThese two devices (external TB RAID vs. internal PCI SSD) operate in somewhat different parts of the (high end) of the bandwidth/capacity plane. Anand (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4489/promise-pegasus-r6-mac-thunderbolt-review/6 http://www.anandtech.com/show/4489/promise-pegasus-r6-mac-th...) found ~700MB/s sequential read/write performance of the TB RAID. He didn't test IOPS directly, although he did put SSDs into the TB RAID and test that (~1000 MB/s). You have to give him credit for that. In short, the sequential performance is pretty close to the real-world sequential performance of the OCZ unit. Which is quite impressive. The Promise RAID-6 I use has 8TB usable (and I got it 2 years ago). The units you mention have just 1TB usable (and no redundancy, which is a problem for big data sets). All this is somewhat academic for my use case, because I dropped my desktop two years ago when TB came out.