Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Network arrow EonNAS 1100 NAS Network Storage Server

EonNAS 1100 NAS Network Storage Server E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Network
Written by Bruce Normann   
Wednesday, 05 December 2012
Table of Contents: Page Index
EonNAS 1100 NAS Network Storage Server
Closer Look: EonNAS 1100
Insider Details: EonNAS 1100
Technology Details: EonNAS 1100
EonNAS 1100 Features
Hardware Specifications
Software Specifications
NAS Setup and Usage
NAS Testing Methodology
Basic-Disk Test Results
RAID 5 Test Results
Intel NASPT Test Results
Non-Traditional NAS Results
NAS Server Final Thoughts
EonNAS 1100 Conclusion

Non-Traditional NAS Test Results

In addition to measuring simple timed transfers, to determine how fast it will read and write contiguous blocks of data, Benchmark Reviews also measures NAS performance using some tests that are traditionally used for internal drives. By mapping the EonNAS 1100 as a local drive, some of our favorite HDD/SSD benchmarking tools worked just fine. Just like the NASPT test suite, I only run these tests on the RAID 5 configuration, as that is the most realistic scenario for a system like this. Some NAS products don't work too well with this type of test program; even though they may have the ability to map the NAS device to a drive letter, they're still not treated like local drives by the Operating System. I didn't have that problem with the EonNAS unit, so let's look at some results...

ATTO Disk Benchmark Results

The ATTO Disk Benchmark program is free, and offers a comprehensive set of test variables to work with. In terms of disk performance, it measures interface transfer rates at various intervals for a user-specified length and then reports read and write speeds for these spot-tests. There are some minor improvements made to the 2.46 version of the program that allow for test lengths up to 2GB, but all of our benchmarks are conducted with 256MB total length. ATTO Disk Benchmark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested. Please consider the results displayed by this benchmark to be basic bandwidth speed performance indicators.


The EonNAS 1100 turned in a good performance on ATTO, reaching a peak Read speed of 99.8 MB/s and a peak Write speed of 99.9 MB/s. These results are below the very top tier of NAS performance, and part of that is due to the additional load the ZFS file system puts on the hardware. The leader so far in sequential performance is the Thecus N5550, which has a very similar set of hardware powering the device, and the Linux operating system inside of it definitely offers a speed advantage in the typical NAS device.

It's good to keep in mind that these ATTO tests are not always indicative of real-world performance, due to the sequential access mode used. In most cases, the results are going to be close to the numbers achieved in timed Read and Write tests. They are also going to be way above the results from some of the more challenging tests in the Intel NASPT suite. It's interesting to note that roughly 95% of the maximum performance level was reached by the 32 kB block size. That's a sign of good RAID management, and the high performance hard drives that are used in our testing.


CrystalDiskMark Results

CrystalDiskMark 3.0 is a file transfer and operational bandwidth benchmark tool from Crystal Dew World that offers performance transfer speed results using sequential, 512KB random, and 4KB random samples. For our test results chart below, the 4KB 32-Queue Depth read and write performance was measured using a 1000MB space. CrystalDiskMark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested. Benchmark Reviews uses CrystalDiskMark to illustrate operational IOPS performance with multiple threads. In addition to our other tests, this benchmark allows us to determine operational bandwidth under heavy load.


The combination of the EonNAS 1100 and four Western Digital Caviar Black WD7502AAEX 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s generates some decent numbers in this test. It pulls a respectable 46.8 MB/s on sequential Read and a better result of 85.3 MB/s average on sequential Write tests. The 4k tests show very low numbers, but that's typical of HDDs, even in a RAID configuration. That's one of the huge advantages that SSDs bring to the table, is the ability to handle thousand of small data chunks very gracefully. But look at what happens when the Queue Depth is increased; the 4K:QD32 test is usually a killer for most storage systems, but the EonNAS scores a hefty 68.9 MB/s on Read, while Write is still down in the single digits at 7.6 MB/s.


All in all, these are a respectable set of results for Network Attached Storage. Sure, they're a bit lower than a true local drive connection, directly into the SATA controller on the motherboard. But, for a NAS device mimicking a local HDD, the EonNAS 1100 performs very well. A couple of the NAS devices we've tested are faster, but none of them offers the security and space saving features you get with the ZFS file system on the EonNAS series.



# socalbadboyErnest Ngalula 2012-12-06 16:53
I didn't know Infortrend make NAS... I thought they have always focused on enterprise-level storage? This looks pretty interesting... Can't believe they are using ZFS with dedupe, compression, ZFS checksum on an 1U server that's so cheap.

Very interesting....
Report Comment
# Me too...Bruce 2012-12-08 18:41
I was surprised myself when I first saw the press release for the new EonNAS 1000 line. THIS is something new, I said to myself, at the time. Then another reader commented that he wished some NAS maker would see the light and start using ZFS. I put 2 & 2 together and said, we have to review this!
Report Comment
# Self-Made Geekzack 2012-12-06 17:19
great review. my start-up has actually been looking into a ZFS storage solution, but didn't know if it was worth the cost. really glad i read this review, now actually considering trying this product out.
Report Comment
# Just curiousBruce 2012-12-08 18:43
Were you looking at strictly commercial products or were you considering a DIY solution with FreeNAS, or another open source software?
Report Comment

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews

Like Benchmark Reviews on FacebookFollow Benchmark Reviews on Twitter