Performance
Test system:
- Intel Core 2 Duo E6750
- Asus P5E3
- 1GB Kingston DDR3 RAM
- EVGA 7900GS
- Western Digital JD 80GB SATA drive
- Enermax Infiniti 720W
We tested the performance of the enclosures by installing a Seagate Momentus 5400.2 100GB IDE drive into the 2.5” enclosure and a Seagate Momentus 5400.3 120GB into the 3.5” enclosure to help keeping the results comparable.
|
|
2.5” Jazz
Sandra-USB connection-Physical Drive Performance |
2.5” Jazz
Sandra-USB connection-Removable Storage Performance |
|
|
3.5” Jazz
Sandra-USB connection-Physical Drive Performance |
3.5” Jazz
Sandra-USB connection-Removable Storage Performance |
|
3.5” Jazz - eSATA-HD Tune |
|
|
3.5” Jazz
Sandra-eSATA connection-Physical Drive Performance |
3.5” Jazz
Sandra-eSATA connection-Removable Storage Performance |
|
3.5” Jazz - Direct SATA-HD Tune |
|
|
3.5” Jazz
Sandra-Direct SATA connection-Physical Drive Performance |
3.5” Jazz
Sandra-Direct SATA connection-Removable Storage Performance |
Over the USB connection, the 2.5” Jazz enclosure is slower than the 3.5” counterpart even though the performance of their discs should be similar. The 2.5” has a drive index of 26MB/s while the 3.5” can almost reach 29MB/s. The sequential read speed of the 3.5” Jazz over the USB connection is 32MB/s which is very good by today’s standards, while the 2.5” Jazz can reach 29MB/s. The 3.5” also offers an eSATA connection, so we tested the eSATA performance compared to a direct SATA connection and there was no performance loss at all; the eSATA connection will allow the installed drive to reach its maximum speeds without restriction, so installing faster drives inside the 3.5” Jazz enclosure will increase the eSATA performance but will not affect the USB performance which is limited by the capabilities of the USB bus.
