Technology content trusted in North America and globally since 1999
8,160 Reviews & Articles | 61,616 News Posts

12Gb/s SAS Seagate 6TB Enterprise Capacity 3.5 HDD v4 Review

By: Paul Alcorn | HDDs in IT/Datacenter | Posted: Jun 28, 2014 10:50 am
TweakTown Rating: 93%Manufacturer: Seagate

4k Random Read/Write




Each level tested includes 300 data points (five minutes of one second reports) to illustrate performance variability. The line for each queue depth represents the average speed reported during the five-minute interval. 4K random speed measurements are an important metric when comparing drive performance, as the hardest type of file access for any storage solution to master is small-file random. One of the most sought-after performance specifications, 4K random performance is a heavily marketed figure.


The 12Gb/s SAS Seagate Enterprise Capacity 3.5 HDD v4 averages 255 IOPS at QD256, the SAS HGST Ultrastar He6 averages 264 IOPS at QD256, while the SATA v4 averages 262 IOPS. The SAS He6 is faster than the Seagate SAS v4 in this random read test. This was not the case with the Seagate SATA v4, which easily led the HGST SATA He6.




The SAS v4 provides the lowest latency.




The write workload also yields an unexpected change to the results we observed in the original SATA v4 article. The SAS v4 averages 265 IOPS at QD256, the SAS He6 averages 248 IOPS, and the SATA v4 averages 289 IOPS. The SAS v4 leads the test, but it is apparent there is a slight performance reduction compared to its SATA sibling. The SAS He6 is also faster than its SATA counterpart, which only averaged 234 IOPS in the same test.




All three drives deliver optimum performance-to-latency ratios at lower queue depths.




Our write percentage testing illustrates the varying performance of each solution with mixed workloads. The 100% column to the right is a pure write workload of the 4k file size, and 0% represents a pure 4k read workload.


The SAS v4 lags slightly behind its SATA counterpart, but is well above the SAS He6.




We record power consumption measurements during our test run at QD256. The SAS V4 averages 10.17 Watts, the He6 averages 7.11 Watts, and the SATA v4 averages 9.53 Watts. The SAS v4 exhibits an expected incremental increase in power consumption due to its dual-port connection. The He6 demonstrates elite power consumption that is nearly the same as the 7.03 Watts consumed by the SATA variant.






We generate IOPS-to-Watts measurements from data recorded during the test period. Our 4k write results indicate a win for the He6 in efficiency with an average of 34 IOPS per Watt. In our 4k read test, the SAS v4 averages 25 IOPS per Watt, the He6 averages 34 IOPS-per-Watt, and the SATA v4 measures 24 IOPS-per-Watt. The SAS He6 is actually more efficient than the SATA version due to slightly higher performance.

    PRICING: You can find products similar to this one for sale below.

    United States: Find other tech and computer products like this over at Amazon's website.

    United Kingdom: Find other tech and computer products like this over at Amazon UK's website.

    Canada: Find other tech and computer products like this over at Amazon Canada's website.

    We at TweakTown openly invite the companies who provide us with review samples / who are mentioned or discussed to express their opinion of our content. If any company representative wishes to respond, we will publish the response here.

Related Tags

Got an opinion on this content? Post a comment below!