The Western Digital Advanced Format Performance Comparison Guide

Discussion in 'Reviews & Articles' started by Adrian Wong, Jul 3, 2010.

  1. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    Advanced Format is mainly about expanding the capacity of hard disk drives. However, it does have some effect on performance. By packing in more data in less space, Advanced Format allows for higher areal density. So, we can expect higher sequential transfer rates from Advanced Format drives. The closer spatiality of the data blocks should also improve sequential seek times.

    Of course, all this is merely theoretical, based on what we understand about Advanced Format. To find out the exact effect Advanced Format has on the performance of the hard disk drive, we undertook to test two similar hard disk drives. The only difference is one supports Advanced Format, while the other uses the legacy sector size of 512 bytes. Let's take a look...

    [​IMG]

    Link : The Western Digital Advanced Format Performance Comparison Guide
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2010
  2. graysky

    graysky ARP Reviewer

    Nice review as always. Did you align the partitions on that drive when you did your tests or was it completely unpartitioned?

    Here is the proper way to align the partitions with these Advance Format drives under Linux (dunno how to do it under windows). I own a WD20EARS by the way.

    Used fdisk (setting both modes 'c' and 'u') and align it to sector 2048 - interestingly, in sector mode, the default starting point is not 63 or 64 but 2048 in the current version of fdisk (2.17.2) so it's automatically taking care of the 4k sector size for me. Everything works fast so I'm assuming that it's correct.

    Credit to this post.

    Here are some reference numbers on three drives:

    a = Seagate 7200.12 ST31000528AS (1.0 TB) spinning at 7200 RPM
    b = WD Black WD1001FALS (1.0 TB) spinning at 7200 RPM
    c = WD Green WD20EARS (2.0 TB) spinning at 5900 RPM

    Code:
    # hdparm -Tt /dev/sd[a-c]
    
    /dev/sda:
     Timing cached reads:   15512 MB in  1.99 seconds = 7780.21 MB/sec
     Timing buffered disk reads:  338 MB in  3.02 seconds = 112.07 MB/sec
    
    /dev/sdb:
     Timing cached reads:   15796 MB in  1.99 seconds = 7922.77 MB/sec
     Timing buffered disk reads:  308 MB in  3.01 seconds = 102.20 MB/sec
    
    /dev/sdc:
     Timing cached reads:   15128 MB in  1.99 seconds = 7586.77 MB/sec
     Timing buffered disk reads:  356 MB in  3.01 seconds = 118.08 MB/sec
    
    Not too bad considering the WD20EARS spins ~18 % slower than the other two.

    NOTW: This drive also attempts to park the read heads once every 8 seconds which is just horrible. Use hdparm in your /etc/rc.local to disable this 'feature' and likely add life to your hdd:

    Code:
    # echo "hdparm -S 242 /dev/sdX" > /etc/rc.local
    
    Use the following bash script I wrote to detect the presence of this drive on your system in case you use it periodically as I do as a backup drive and automatically send that hdparm command. Note that I only have a single WD20EARS on my system - this script won't work for multiple copies.

    Code:
    #!/bin/bash
    test=`fdisk -l | grep 2000.4 | cut -c13-13`
    if [ -z "$test" ]; then
     echo retarded drive not found, exiting
     exit 0
    else
     echo retarded drive found, fixing lcc
     hdparm -S 242 /dev/sd$test
    fi
    
     
  3. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    There was no need to align the partition because I was using Windows Vista and Windows 7. Also, I only used a single empty partition, although that should not make a difference in Windows Vista or Windows 7.
     

Share This Page