Quantcast
BROWSE ARTICLES BY CATEGORY
Ximeta 80GB NetDisk
 
Author:
Editor:
Sponsor:
Published:
Brian Kristensen
Kurtis
Ximeta
Jan. 3, 2004
Performance

To test the NetDisk, I decided to compare the performance of the Netdisk in Ethernet mode, USB mode, and by directly accessing (via IDE) the hard drive trapped inside the NetDisk. We did a full format of the NetDisk for each benchmark for the most accurate results.

SiSoft Sandra is a synthetic benchmark used to measure the theoretical performance of different system devices. Because of this, the results seen here may not reflect real world results and your opinion of the NetDisk should not be swayed too much until you see the results of further benchmarking.

SiSoft Sandra File System Benchmark
Performance (higher is better)
Ethernet NetDisk
USB NetDisk
IDE NetDisk
7854
16056
37310
0
kB/s
50000
 
 

Not surprisingly, the NetDisk in USB 2.0 mode is more than twice as fast as the NetDisk in Ethernet mode. Could this be because Ethernet supports speeds up to 100 Mb/s while USB 2.0 supports up to 480 Mb/s? (Yes, that's a rhetorical question!)

HDTach is more of a real-world benchmark which will show a much better representation of what to expect when using the NetDisk in the different modes.

HDTach
Average Read Speed (higher is better)
Ethernet NetDisk
USB NetDisk
IDE NetDisk
10046
16806
47058
0
kB/s
60000
 
 

Once again, the NetDisk in Ethernet mode performs the worst, but HDTach's 10,046 kB/s is much better than Sandra's 7,854 kB/s. Still, neither of the modes comes close to the bare drive's average read speed of 47,058 kB/s.

Our final test is using DiskBench, which creates a file on the drive and measures the time and speed it takes to do so. For our bench, I had DiskBench create a 500 MB file in ten 50 MB blocks.

DiskBench Transfer Rate
Transfer Rate (higher is better)
Ethernet NetDisk
USB NetDisk
IDE NetDisk
6.16
26.91
50.32
0
MB/s
60
 
 

DiskBench Creation Time
Creation Time (lower is better)
Ethernet NetDisk
USB NetDisk
IDE NetDisk
81234
18578
9937
0
Milliseconds
100000
 
 

The actual size of the file was 524,288,000 bytes. In Ethernet mode, it took the NetDisk ~81 seconds to create the 500 MB file; much slower than the ~18 seconds in USB mode and the ~9 seconds in IDE mode. This places the bare hard drive at ~50 Mb/s, the USB mode at ~27 Mb/s and Ethernet mode at ~6 Mb/s.

During our testing, I found the NetDisk to get quite warm, which would be quite obvious considering it has no active cooling. It doesn't get overly hot, and overheating should not be a problem. The hard drive inside is a Samsung SP0802N, and because of its' "Fluid Dynamic Bearing Spindle Motor Technology" and lack of other mechanical devices inside the NetDisk, noise is minimal.

 
<< Previous
Page 4 of 5
Next >>
Page 1: Introduction
Page 2: A Closer Look
Page 3: Setting up the NetDisk
Page 4: Performance
Page 5: Issues / Conclusion

Related Reviews
Storage December 7, 2005

3 User Comments
1 - Posted by Kurtis on January 4, 2004 - 12:31 am

Ximeta’s NetDisk is not only a USB 2.0 accessible hard drive, it is also accessible to a computer or an entire network via a 100Mbps Ethernet port. Is this an external hard drive or pocket sized file server?

http://www.thetechlounge.com/review.php?directory=...

2 - Posted by zero_seek on June 15, 2004 - 6:50 pm

I'm actually using their new 3.03 multi-write drivers, and it is working great for me with 3 machines (2 winxp and 1 win2k machine). I had a problem upgrading, but after talking to ximeta support, they sent me a cleanup utility to install everything from scratch and that solved everything...all in all a great drive and great support...

-steve

3 - Posted by Guest on August 14, 2004 - 1:45 pm

I bought this product with high expectations. These were not met.
1) It is not a server, so it has to be run with special software on any computer that access it (assuming using ethernet)
2) The one I got, and the one a friend of mine got (at the same time) have never worked.
3) I sent mine back for warranty replacement. I bought the unit end of april, and have still not received a replacement. It is now middle of August. I am giving up on getting my money back.
My advice, do not buy products from this company.

Add Comment

To add a comment without being a member, you may omit the password field, but you must enter your name (or nickname) along with your comment. * Denotes required fields.

Username: *


Password: (optional)
(Remember my login information: )

Comment: *


What is 1+2?: *


 
 
 
Recent News
Jason Bradbury Mar. 19, 2010 - 10:52 pm
joystiq Mar. 19, 2010 - 6:58 pm
Mar. 19, 2010 - 2:25 am
Rock Paper Shotgun Mar. 18, 2010 - 11:58 pm
Fudzilla Mar. 18, 2010 - 11:57 pm
CVG Mar. 18, 2010 - 11:53 pm
Tech Radar Mar. 16, 2010 - 11:58 pm
Mar. 16, 2010 - 11:50 pm