I’m always looking at hard drives and ways that I can expand my storage capacity to better organize my systems and backups of those systems. The following is not strictly a review of the FreeAgent GoFlex 4TB or the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card but more of a chronology of how well they work in my systems and a few basic performance ratings.

Not long ago I noticed that Amazon had a price of $229 on Seagate’s FreeAgent GoFlex 4TB External Desk Drive STAC4000100. More recently, I’ve seen prices for the GoFlex 4TB hover just above $200. Always before I considered myself a Western Digital fan boy but after testing the Seagate ST3000DM01 in my MicroServer I’ve been substantially more open minded about exploring off the Western Digital reservation.

What I found very intriguing about the 4TB GoFlex was that at its core was the 4TB Seagate Barracuda XT ST4000X000 SATA 6Gb/s Hard Drive that was, and still is, selling at a substantially higher price than the 4TB GoFlex when it is sold as a bare drive outside the external case. There is a video out that gives step by step instructions on how to remove the enclosure/casing from around the ST4000X000 so that it can be used inside a desktop – which obviously violated the warranty on the GoFlex. Removing the ST4000X000 from the GoFlex housing is beyond the scope of this paper.

I ordered the GoFlex 4TB intending to try it out on several of my machines. I also ordered Western Digital’s USB 3.0 PCIe Card which would fit perfectly inside my MicroServer.

The Seagate GoFlex 4TB USB 3.0

The GoFlex 4TB Unpacked

After the GoFlex 4TB arrived I unpacked it and set it up. I first attached it to the USB 3.0 port on the back of my X58.

The GoFlex 4TB USB 3.0 attached to the GA-X58A-UD3R USB 3.0 ports on back and powered up

I powered up the GoFlex 4TB. My X58 saw it right away. I opened up Windows Explorer and check out the directory.

While I didn’t try it in this exercise — the GoFlex 4TB comes supplied with software to set up automatic backups to the GoFlex 4TB. I’m sure their software is good – it just wasn’t the reason I bought the GoFlex 4TB to try out and I already have a backup solution that I am using.

Directory of what is on the GoFlex 4TB as seen in Windows Explorer

A detailed directory view of what came on the GoFlex 4TB in Windows Explorer

Checking out the Properties of the GoFlex 4TB it showed the available capacity on the 4TB drive as 4TB (less some space being used by the included Seagate software mentioned above).

Properties of the GoFlex 4TB

As shown below the performance of the GoFlex 4TB (and the underlying ST4000X000) on the USB 3.0 with reads and writes around 170 MB/sec.

ATTO performance of GoFlex 4TB on X58 USB 3.0 rear Port

I next moved the GoFlex 4TB to one of the USB 3.0 ports on the back of my Z68 and got similar results that I had achieved with the X58’s 3.0 ports, i.e. reads and writes between 160 & 180 MB/sec.

While the GoFlex 4TB was attached to the Z68’s USB 3.0 port I copied about 400GB of files to the GoFlex 4TB over about a 70 minute time period.

Atto performance of GoFlex 4TB on Z68 USB 3.0 rear Port

Western Digital’s USB 3.0 PCIe Card in a MicroServer

I mentioned earlier that I also picked up a WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card to try out in my MicroServer. The WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card arrived in a plain box. The Card comes with a drivers disk that you install before you install the PCIe Card. I installed the drivers onto the host operating system on my MicroServer which is Windows Server 2008-R2.

The WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card and Driver Install Disk

Installing WD Driver onto the MicroServer using an external USB drive

The MicroServer powered down and placed on grounding mat -- preparing to remove the motherboard/system-board

After installing the Western Digital drivers for the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card I powered down the MicroServer, unplugged it, and moved it to my workbench and set it onto a grounding mat. I then attached a ground strap to myself and began taking the MicroServer apart. You’ll observer in the first picture below (left) that the dual Intel NIC that I had installed earlier has been replaced by a single NIC Intel card. In the second picture below (right) we see the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card installed in the Mother Board, or System Board, of the MicroServer.

Below (left) we see the MicroServer Mother Board from the back with both PCIe Cards installed and the card NIC and USB connection ports clearly visible. Below (right) is a top view of the MicroServer Mother Board with the cards installed.

Installing a second PCIe card into the MicroServer was problematic in one respect because by filling up both slots I lost my empty slot to run my cable (see lower left picture) from my eSATA port on the back of the MicroServer into the case to plug into the WD Green drive in the ODD in the top of the MicroServer.

The solution I found was to bend the bracket, also known as the PCI holder, that anchors the top of the PCI brackets 1 & 2 to the case. Just a “slight” bend was all that was necessary and is clearly visible in the lower (right) picture. Another option I considered was to use a dermal to make a new hole in the case for the cable – bending the bracket, PCI holder, was easier and probably the better solution in my estimate.

Below, the Western Digital software successfully installed onto the MicroServer before opening up the MicroServer and installing the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card.

WD drivers installed for USB 3.0 PCIe Card

Below, is the performance of the GoFlex 4TB using the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card in the MicroServer. The read and write speeds are just over 140 MB/sec which is roughly 30 MB/sec worse than the performance achieved with the USB 3.0 ports that are available on the X58 and Z68 boards tested earlier.

ATTO performance of GoFlex 4TB USB 3.0 with WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card mounted in MicroServer

The performance in the MicroServer is respectable for the GoFlex 4TB with the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card though it doesn’t measure up to the performance I saw with the Seagate 3TB ST3000DM001 when it was directly installed to a SATA II port inside the MicroServer.

Compared to a directly installed ST3000DM001 the GoFlex 4TB has the additional overhead of the WD USB 3.0 interface card as well as the interface of the Seagate external enclosure USB 3.0 to SATA base. Compared to the GoFlex 4TB’s performance in the X58 and the Z68 the WD USB 3.0 card in the MicroServer is apparently not as fast as the direct motherboard USB 3.0 connections on the X58 and Z68.

USB 2.0 Performance Comparisons

For comparison, I check the performance of the GoFlex 4TB when plugged into one of the USB 2.0 ports in the MicroServer. The ATTO performance charts below show that the GoFlex 4TB’s performance when attached to the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card (below left) was about five times the performance when it was attached to a USB 2.0 port (below right) on the MicroServer.

Next I compared the relative performance of the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card to the USB 2.0 ports in the MicroServer by attaching a WD 2TB Elements USB 2.0 External disk. Surprisingly to me, the WD 2TB Elements USB 2.0 External Disk performed slightly better when attached to the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card (below right) versus the USB 2.0 port (below left) on the MicroServer.

Conclusion

In the short time that I’ve used it the GoFlex 4TB has been reliable and relatively fast low cost mass storage. The WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card provides a low cost option of attaching 2 external devices to my MicroServer – in the case of the GoFlex 4TB – I could add 2 GoFlex 4TB’s for a total of 8TB of additional storage on my MicroServer. I could do likewise with my Z68 and X58 machines.

Bottom line: I like the GoFlex 4TB. I’m impressed with its ease of use and its speed for an external drive and of course I’m impressed by its massive capacity. I also like the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card – it expands my options with my MicroServer (the MicroServer is not built with any USB 3.0 ports) and it is an option for adding additional USB 3.0 ports to my other machines. It was interesting to observer that a regular USB 2.0 external drive performed about 16% better when attached to the WD USB 3.0 PCIe Card versus a USB 2.0 port in the MicroServer.

The big question remains: how would the Seagate ST4000X000 that makes up the core of the GoFlex 4TB perform on it’s own as a bare drive directly connected to a SATA III or SATA II port?

Answering that question will have to wait till the next installment (Part 2) of this report.

Zalman (http://www.zalman.com/eng/main.asp) is pretty well known for their computer accessories, particularly their CPU and GPU cooling products. Over the past few years they have expanded their line to include cases, power supplies, VGA cards, hard disk enclosures, and others.

Recently, Zalman released a 2.5” hard drive enclosure that brings a new wrinkle to the genre. The VE200 enclosure, in addition to providing the usual USB hard disk features, has the ability to act as a virtual CD/DVD drive.

What is the point of a virtual CD/DVD drive? Well, if you load .ISO files onto the drive in the enclosure, it can mount them and present them to a computer as if they are real CDs or DVDs. Imagine being able to have all your installation CDs/DVDs on one device and to use a small LCD display to pick and choose which one you want to use — pick an ISO, mount it as a CD or DVD, and boot the computer from it exactly as if it was in a physical CD/DVD drive. At the very least it greatly simplifies installing Operating Systems on devices like netbooks that have no Optical Disk Drive.

REQUIREMENTS

There are a few requirements in order to obtain a working VE200 setup:

1. The VE200 kit
2. A 2.5” SATA hard drive
3. A computer with a free USB2/3 port (Windows is OK; don’t know about Mac)

THE SYSTEM

This is what you get.

Opening the box reveals this:

So, without being too fancy, it was nicely packaged.

Here are the complete contents of the boxs:

From top left: the Quick Guide, VE200. a leatherette carrying case with a small package containing a tiny screwdriver and 4 screws. Bottom row: eSATA cable and USB A-miniB cable (but not such a ‘standard’ one as it might appear — more on that later). Although the Zalman web site seems to indicate that it comes with a CD, mine did not.

As noted in the requirements, a customer-provided 2.5″ SATA hard drive is required to complete the system. Pretty much any 2.5″ SATA drive will do. In other words, almost any modern laptop drive.

The connection ports for the VE200 are along the top of the unit:

From left to right: an eSATA connector, a small hole that contains a Reset button, a blue LED to indicate activity, a slot containing a switch to write protect/enable the drive, and a USB 2 miniB connector.

The USB connector is critical. The VE200 is completely USB powered. Although the Guide doesn’t mention it, I assume this means you need to be using a USB port that has battery charging capability. I don’t see how it could supply enough power otherwise.

I have not used the eSATA connector. I did plug it in once, but the unit did not power up. I presume they included eSATA in order to facilitate faster-than-USB file transfers. To be honest, I haven’t really found that to be an issue, and I can’t really see the usefulness of having to plug the unit in with both eSATA and USB in order to get it to work. Everything that follows is based entirely on using the USB port.

PUTTING IT TOGETHER

The first step to getting the VE200 set up is to install the hard drive. To do this, the head containing the LCD display has to be separated from the case. Try resting the back of the unit on the tips of your fingers, (i.e. LCD display face up) and away from you. Now, put your thumbs on the LCD display and gently push the display away from you.

If that doesn’t seem to work, the head may be wedged into the case a bit too tightly. In that case, look at the diagram below. Notice that there are 2 plastic/rubber strips along the sides of the VE200.

Use the small screwdriver included with the kit to peel back the strip on one side and gently pry up the LCD head on that side to loosen it. Repeat the process on the other side. This should get the head far enough out of the case that you can pull it the rest of the way.

Here’s a look at the business side of the LCD display head.

To install the drive, simply connect the VE200 head’s SATA connector to its mate on the drive.

With the drive attached, simply slide the assembly into the case.

Once the drive and head are fully inserted into the case, complete the installation by using 2 of the supplied screws to lock the VE200′s head to the case. Note: the screws do not go into the drive, only into the head, as per the photo below. This photo also shows the Jog Switch. It is a vital part of the VE200, as we’ll see later.

CONFIGURING THE HARD DRIVE

Once the hard drive has been installed, the next step is to configure it. But first, some background.

The VE200 does not automatically configure the hard drive. This can lead to complications.

The VE200 can only use the first partition/volume on the drive, even if that partition/volume is one that’s hidden in Windows

Many people will likely want to use old laptop drives in VE200s. If a drive comes from a major laptop supplier such as Dell, Lenovo, HP, etc. it will likely contain an OEM recovery partition/volume. These partitions/volumes are normally not visible in Windows Explorer. This means it would be impossible to copy ISO files to the OEM partition/volume, which is the only way the VE200 would see the ISO files.

To get around this problem, the hidden partition(s)/volume(s) must be deleted. I recommend simply deleting all partitions/volumes from the drive and starting afresh.

This creates another issue: Disk Management in Windows can’t normally delete OEM partitions/volumes because they are protected. There are a number of utilities, free and paid, that can do this, but Windows own DiskPart can do the job and it’s provided for free with Windows. I won’t go into how to use DiskPart here; there is plenty of info available on the web and DiskPart’s own built in Help is pretty useful as well.

To configure the drive, connect the VE200 to a Windows computer, using the USB cable provided with the VE200. Most USB A-miniB cables will not work; they will light up the LCD display, and it will look like it’s working, but the hard drive will not power up. Of all the USB A-miniB cables in my own stock, only 1 other would work. Most USB A-A extender cables cannot be used either. Be warned.

Once the VE200 is connected to the computer, clean out any existing partitions/volumes using your utility of choice.

Now that the drive has no partitions/volumes, it’s time to find out what firmware the VE200 has installed.

There are 2 ‘types’ of firmware for the VE200: NTFS, and FAT32/exFAT. It’s important to know which one a particular VE200 has installed because the hard drive must be formatted to match the firmware type. Note: it may be possible to flash an NTFS VE200 with FAT32/exFAT firmware, and vice-versa, but I wasn’t about to kill my VE200 trying to find out.

The Jog Switch is used to find out what version of firmware a VE200 has. With no partitions/volumes on the drive, the VE200 should show something like this on its LCD display:

The Job Switch has 3 positions: up, down, and in (or depressed). To get the version of firmware, depress the Jog Switch 4 times. Each depress will display a different screen.

The first depress will show the model of hard drive in the unit. For example:

The second depress should show the drive serial number:

The third depress will show some number, but I don’t know what it is (perhaps the drive’s firmware number?):

And finally, the fourth depress will show the VE200’s firmware info:

The important item on this screen is the ‘N’ at the very end. It indicates that the firmware is NTFS (FAT32/exFAT firmware has as ‘F’ at the end). BTW, as of this writing, this is the latest firmware release.

Next, create a new partition/volume on the drive. I recommend using the entire drive because the VE200 can only use the first partition. I won’t go into details on how to create a partition as there is tons of info available on the internet. The main things are to assign a drive letter to the partition/volume (so ISO files can be copied to it later), and to format the partition/volume to match the version of firmware installed in the VE200.

The final step in configuring the drive is to create a directory/folder named “_iso” at the root of the newly created partition. This is critical. All ISO files must reside in this _iso directory/folder or the VE200 will NOT be able to mount them as virtual CDs or DVDs.

With the “_iso” directory/folder created, the configuration of the drive is complete.

Using the VE200

As a first test, copy an .ISO file to the _iso directory/folder. The ISO needs to be a mountable image file. A Windows 7 or XP installation DVD ISO makes a good test case.

Once the file is copied, either eject the VE200 (just like any other USB external drive) and disconnect and reconnect it, or use a paperclip to press the Reset Button on the top of the VE200. After the unit reboots it should show the name of the ISO file that was copied to it. I used a Windows XP ISO and it looks like this:

Notice the second icon from the left in the top row; the one that looks like a tire. It indicates that the ISO is mounted. Depressing the Jog Switch mounts and unmounts ISO files. So, depressing it once shows this:

Moving the Jog Switch down once will give the full name of the ISO file:

At this point I recommend trying to boot from the VE200. Make sure the VE200 shows that your ISO file is mounted, then reboot your PC and use its boot menu to select the ZMVE Virtual CDRom as the boot device. You should get the normal bootup for your computer; the same as you would get if you booted from a physical CD/DVD.

After verifying that the VE200 does boot correctly, it’s use can be expanded. For one thing, it supports folders, very much like Windows Explorer.

To go into a folder depress the Jog Switch.

Pushing the Jog Switch up repeatedly will eventually take you to the Level Up screen:

Depressing the Jog Switch at this screen will move the VE200 up to the parent directory/folder.

It’s possible to create nested layers of directories/folders. I created a 4-deep stack without issue.

I have not used the eSATA port.

PROS

• Inexpensive (around $50US). This might seem a little high for an external enclosure, but the virtual drive capability puts it in another class in my opinion.
• Small, lightweight.
• The kit is quite complete, even including a carrying case and screwdriver.
• Simple to use, once the initial hurdles are overcome.
• A very handy device that can take the place of many single-purpose bootable flash drives, CDs, and DVDs.
• The display provides some nice information, such as the hard drive temperature. The icons are logical, well-placed, and pretty intuitive to understand, at least to a Windows user.

CONS

• Extremely poor documentation. If only the documentation matched the physical completeness of the kit.
• Initial configuration is manual, and the user is left to fend for themselves, particularly with regard to getting the hard drive configured properly.
• The Jog Switch can be difficult to use, especially trying to find the correct position so it can be depressed. Separate buttons would have been better, but likely would have added to the cost.
• Cannot use commonly available USB A-miniB cables.
• The supplied USB cable is too short.
• The LCD display is small. It works, but a little larger would have been better.
• Not every ISO can be used. I found that the Windows Home Server 2011 Client Restore Disk ISO could not be used because the VE200 would reset itself part way through the Restore Wizard. I suspect this is because the wizard reinitialized all of the USB ports as part of its normal process. On the other hand, Windows XP ran without problems.

CONCERNS

Probably my biggest concern about the VE200 is the Jog Switch. This is an inexpensive device, and the Jog Switch gets used so much that I’m concerned that it might not last too long. That would essentially make the VE200 a paperweight. Of course, it’s always possible to just get another one, and it should even be possible to transfer the hard drive from a dead VE200 to a new one.

SUMMARY

The VE200 is a pretty amazing device. It accomplishes its main goal very well. Keeping the Cons & Concerns in mind, I would recommend it to anyone who has a working knowledge of Windows; in other words, Power Users. Hopefully, this review/tutorial can overcome most of the lack of documentation and get people up and running faster.

I am now in the midst of getting rid of most of the mostly single-purpose, bootable USB Flash drives that I use to do installations. I am copying ISO files for OS installs, MS Office, Adobe Creative Suite CS5 Production Premium, LightRoom, SpinRite, CloneZilla, and many others, to the VE200.

I will now have a single place where I can find all these images, and from which I can install any of them. There will be no more inserting and removing of a pile of USB Flash Drives, trying to find the one that contains a particular install image. USB Flash Drives are certainly convenient, and they’re small, but their size also makes it hard to label them and keep them organized. They are also easily lost. The VE200 nicely addresses both of these issues.

Also gone will be the issue of fighting a specific USB Flash Drive to make it bootable, only to find that this particular model of flash drive can’t be made bootable.

SUMMARY

I’m giving the VE200 4 out of 5 stars. The terrible documentation, the fact that the VE200 doesn’t auto-configure the drive, and concerns over the Jog Switch mainly contributed to it not getting a higher rating. However, it’s overall usefulness prevented it from getting a lower score.

Original article can be found HERE

I tested all combinations using the same hardware that was used for the parity test.  I tested the JBOB/Stripe, as well as a 2 and 3 drive Mirror.  Based on performance I am assuming that it is creating a striped array versus a JBOD although I could not verify it.  Also, when using one large volume, you cannot choose between 2 or three drive only the allocation size.  When using a mirror, you can select how many layers of the mirror that you want as well as how much space you ultimately want.

Two drive Mirror

As you can see from the benchmarks, using a mirror is far more desirable than using a parity if you are going to use Storage Spaces.  Overall usability and streaming were fine, and looking at the copy file chart, performance was on par with a single drive.  There was some heavy swings in the copy chart but overall was fine for most cases.  The downside of course is that you lose space over a parity configuration.

Three Drive Mirror

Not much different in the way of performance using a three drive mirror.  Benchmarks are about the same but file copying was a bit more sporadic.  The advantage is you have two additional layers of protection which might be an overkill if you are backing up to an external location or cloud service.  The downside is you use three drives to do the job.

Stripe/JBOD

As expected, performance was significantly higher in this configuration.  I could not verify how this was configured but based on the performance charts, I am guessing that it configures as a stripe not JBOD.  Besides the benchmarks, the file copy was extremely smooth and constant with little to no fluctuation.  The downside is there is no resiliency in this configuration nor can you control how many hard disks it uses

Conclusion

It is pretty obvious from looking at the benchmarks and comparing to the parity testing that either of these configuration is preferable in terms of performance.  Every configuration has give and takes but for modest needs, the mirror seems to be great way to go.  It performs pretty well, it is scalable, and of course it provides hardware resiliency (duplication).  Since Storage Spaces works on the provision approach, you can provision for a larger drive, say 5T, and your mirror will simply scale the configuration automatically you have till you reach the desire space simply by adding hard drives.

Hardware setup

I opted to install this into what I call my secondary system.  This is a system I use every day and the unit I use for ripping, converting, and video work.  Below is the hardware specs of the machine.

Core I7-2600
Gigabyte Z68
16 Gigs of DDR3-1600
120 Gig Vertex 2
2T EARS Drive
2T FAEX drive

To test this card I added a 3T WD green drive for the main storage drive and for the cache, I added 2 OCZ Vertex 3 60 Gig SSD’s mounted in a Lian Li 2.5 to 3.5 inch adapter.

Software Setup

Before I get into the software, let me first say that when I first tried to load the CD that came with the card, the software loaded fine except it was the wrong software.  What came on the disk was the standard RAID WebUI software not the version needed for the Rocket Cache.  After downloading the updated version from their website, everything loaded correctly and it allowed me to go into the setup.  The basic steps were to initialize the drives, which is pretty standard in RAID, then to select the configuration you wanted to create.  You have to select the drives you want to use, the caching model, and the number drives you want as a cache.  Clicking on the “more information” tab gives you the requirements needed and a brief explanation of each of the configuration models.

Configuration Results (single SSD, protection mode)

I tried the card in two ways.  The first was a single SSD with “High Performance with Cache Performance”.  This mode does not delay writes but caches reads.  The results are what you would expect and writes are basically the same as a stand alone hard drive.  The reads are cached and roughly the speed of the SSD you have attached.

Configuration Results (dual SSD, Maximum performance mode)

This is the configuration were things really happen.  As you can see from the benchmarks, this brings things brings performance a new dimension.  This gave me not only some great benchmarks but the overall usages was greatly improved.  Things like writing video and moving files around were faster and it made the system really perform much better.  The only exception to that was moving huge files like Blu Ray files.  Large files do not seem to benefit from this controller in terms of writes.

The Verdict

Not everything is perfect with this controller.  One annoying issue is the fact that you are only allowed 64 Gigs of cache no matter how many SSD drives you use.  In my configuration, each 60 gig drive was roughly cut in half, basically using 32 Gigs from each drive.  It raids the two drives together giving you the same as a single drive configuration but with the speed of the raid stripe.  The remaining space is useable for standard storage.  If you use three drives, you will be using approximately 21 gigs from each drive to equal the same amount but again at the speed of a three drive raid stripe.  Intel also has a cache limitation but does not offer a multi-drive solution.  Not  shipping with the right version of the software is also annoying but easily remedied.  Lastly, the price is a bit steep for this card.  Granted it works, comes with the cable needed, and is the most flexible solution I have seen yet, but it is still a bit pricey.  In the end it is all about the performance and flexibility.  Caching has always been a comprise but the ability to cache a slower mirror with an SSD, or to cache a stripe of two hard drives with two SSD’s is downright appealing.  I was not sure I would like this controller but as it stands now, this is a keeper.  The performance for the capacity is just awesome as well as the flexibility.  The choice of combinations could end up being what makes this a great solution, especially for the those who need the performance for gaming or video editing.  Overall I really like this board and will be experimenting with more combinations.  This is definitely going to find its way into my main rig once I get more comfortable with how it works.

Link to Windows 8 article:  Storage Spaces in Windows 8

Video on creating a parity volume in Server 8

Benchmark results

As you review the results below, the one that stands out to me is the file copy.  The results I got on Windows 8 were pretty bad.  The result here is still bad but in a different way.  The one strange thing was that file copy on smaller files was very fast, however the larger files was not sustainable and performance decreased.  That said, it is still a whole bunch faster than Windows 8 in file copy and real life use even though the bulk of the benchmarks are the same.

Conclusion

I am still not convinced that Storage Spaces is the way to go, but I am convinced that it is better in Server 8 than Windows 8.  It will be very interesting when this is released as a final product.  When it does, I will there to test it and compare it again to these results.  Hopefully Microsoft can take this great idea and turn it into a killer product.

Test System

• AsRock Gen 3 Z68 motherboard
• Core I5-2500
• 16 Gigs of GSkill DDR3-1600
• 60 Gig M4 SSD for the OS
• 3 x 2T WD EARS drives for storage spaces and RAID testing
• Highpoint Rocket Raid 2680 (for hardware RAID testing)

Storage Spaces Testing

I created a parity volume using storage spaces with 3 2T drives and ran the ATTO, CrystalDiskMark, HD Tune, and File Copy.  The very first advantage was that creating the array was very easy and only took approximately 10 seconds to create.  No RAID building, and very straightforward.  As you can see in the tests below, the performance is not very good.

Hardware Solution

Now that I had completed the testing of Storage Spaces, it was time to kill off the volume and to setup up a hardware RAID 5.  I deleted the Storages Spaces drive as I wanted to reuse the identical hardware in my testing with the only exception being the use of the RAID card.  The obvious thing that happens when you do this is that you have have to install the drivers, WebUI, and of course you have to build the array.  What took 10-15 seconds to do in Storage Spaces, took the customary 4 hours of building the array using the Highpoint.  It is a background task but you still have to wait to achieve maximum performance.  Once it was completed it was time to start testing.

Conclusion

As you can see from the testing (except for HD Tune), the performance of the Storage Spaces is pretty bad in comparison to a hardware solution.  Granted it will most likely be optimized before the final release, but in my mind until they do something drastic, it is far too slow to use.  Real life usage like file copies are painful with large files.  Copying BD for example is 8-10 minutes instead of 1-2 minutes  Everything from creating VM’s, to copying data, to video playback was just not up to par.  I hope that Microsoft is paying attention to this and that it addresses these concerns.  In my opinion, until they do it is simply not worth using for anything serious.

Press Release:  The RocketCache 3240X8 SSD Raid Caching

From Usingwindowshomeserver: http://usingwindowshomeserver.com/2012/01/29/whs-add-in-update-ihomeserver-for-itunes-v2

iHomeServer Site http://www.bizmodeller.com/iHomeServer_for_iTunes.aspx

Defining my problem

For starters it is important to understand why I was excited by this product. Although I have always had my media files on my WHS, it was never really easy to get iTunes configured to default to the server. Of course adding files as well as managing metadata meant going into the clunky and rather slow interface of iTunes on the PC. Add to that the fact you have to leave it running on your PC to share the files across your network, and you end up with an aggravating user experience. Enter iHomeserver into the equation. This product helps bridge the gap between iTunes and Windows Home Server in a couple of ways. In addition, if you do not want to use your WHS, then there are Windows 7, Server 2008, and Server 2003 versions of the software. I will skip over the basic setup and installations as that is already well covered on various sites, and instead cover my particular use case. I installed and tested both the WHS 2011 and Windows 7 as potential options for my particular needs.

First Step

When I first set this up, I did it in a VM so I could test it before moving it to my production server. The goal for this project was to have iTunes functionality on my server since it is on all the time, and to be able to add files to the library from any location/computer without having to go to one specific computer and log into iTunes.

At first when I set this up, I had some issues with getting everything to work. Not because of the software, but because of my rather convoluted iTunes setup. As I did not quite have a complete grasp of how to best implement this, I sent a letter to tech support for advice on the best approach. Ed, the developer of the application over at bizmodeller.com responded almost immediately, and after a couple of questions being answered, as well as following his directions I was able to get it going. The main issue that I came across was that the installation setup almost assumes that you are starting from scratch. It does not assume you have a ton of playlists and things already created like I did. So in a nut shell, the first challenge is to port your iTunes setup to your server or other computer first before attempting to install iHomeserver. Those of you who have messed with moving iTunes around before know that this can be painful but can be done. There are various tutorials online on how to this but in brief, here is what I ended up doing.

Since my existing computer had its default locations moved from a local machine “C:\Users\XXXX\Music” and remapped to \\WHS\Music which is on my server, it was fairly easy for me to go directly into the server and remap the user default locations (ie: Administrator) to the same directory since it was already on the server. In my case, my media and iTunes library is on my RAID partition so I mapped the server properties from “C:\Users\Administrator\Music” to “E:\Music”. Once I did that and installed iTunes on my server, it opened and everything was as I left it, only on the server not the client computer. Once you have iTunes running correctly and all your files and data is intact, installing the iHomeserver is a breeze. Remember that the key is to get iTunes running FIRST. The iHomeserver install will not fix problems if your iTunes is not functioning correctly. In retrospect it was fairly easy however I struggled for a couple of hours and hosed my iTunes library a couple of times before figuring out how to do this correctly.

Issues and problems

Nothing of course is perfect. The main issue I ran into in my particular situation is iTunes itself. As for the iHomeserver software my biggest complaint is that if I want to manage apps at the iTunes level (not the device) I have to RDP into my server, open the dashboard, pause the server, and then launch iTunes and do what I need to do. When I was finished I had to close iTunes, then un-pause the server. Not a big deal in the grander scheme of things but not ideal. I communicated with the developer and asked about the apps and he explained that it was not because of his software, but rather because Apple did not release any API’s to work with apps, only music and movies. He also mentioned that a great number of people now want to sync via WiFi which minimizes the need to log in as much as it used to. In my few communications with him, I mentioned a feature for force updating of podcasts (something that iTunes does not do by itself) and the feature was immediately added in the most recent release. I hope to see this automated at some point as you still need to go into your WHS dashboard to refresh your podcasts. Again not a huge deal but it is something you will have to do. Overall I did not have any major issues related to iHomeserver itself and what I was impressed by was the responsiveness of the developer and his willingness to support the product.

Results and benefits

At first it may not be obvious but the flexibility it afforded me was exactly what I needed. It provided a service based iTunes that ran well on my WHS 2011 providing me with my content 24/7, and most importantly it gave me a way to attach to multiple folders that I could copy content to and have it update my iTunes for me. This is a great feature for households that have several users and want to maintain one library, yet want to have different users add to the collection. By monitoring a folder, I can simply copy an MP4 or MP3 to that folder without ever going into iTunes and have it update my library. Having iTunes library running all the time also made it easier to share through the “Home Sharing” feature of iTunes to any device that plays content from iTunes. In my case, I use a couple of Apple TV’s and this allowed me easier access to all the podcasts, music, and movies that are in my library. Throw in the slick remote control app from Apple and you have a complete package at least within this ecosystem.

Summary

In closing if you are in the iTunes ecosystem and running a Windows Home Server, you might look into this product to see if will benefit you as much as it did me. They have a 30 day free trial so there is little risk in trying it. I would also suggest that you email the developer with any suggestions or post them in the comments as he does listen to our input.

The Package

Software installation and Setup

The first issue I ran into was the software that came up after putting the disk in the drive.  It had some sort of an issues with display drivers and would not display the text in the buttons.  As you can see the writing on the button was blank forcing me to guess as to which button I was supposed to press and what it said.  Once I got past this ridiculous screen, things got much better as it went into more of a standard install.

After the utility came up, it immediately found the second device.  It allowed me to rename it as well as enter in the password which by default is on the device itself.

Performance Testing

Same Room

I used a very crude but realistic method of testing to replicate what I could expect in terms of performance.  I did three things, viewed the utility for the connected bandwidth, file copy performance, and various videos for playback performance.

The first test was in the same room.  As you can see it hooked up at 190 Mbps.  Large file copy was about 5.85 MB/sec. 1080P video stuttered badly however a 4.4 Gig  720P MP4 played perfectly.

Same floor and opposite side of the house

Second test was on the same floor put at two furthest points in the house.  Utility stated a much lower connection speed and large file copy dropped to 4.19 MB/sec.  Video playback was about the same same and the 720P MP4 played just fine.

Furthest point in the house and the lower floor

The final check was to go at the extreme sides of the house from one end of the top floor to the opposite side of the lower floor.  The utility did not show much of a change however the file copy dropped again this time to 3.33 MB/sec.  Video playback of the MP4 was still smooth and seam to play without any stutter.

Conclusion

I am not sure whether or not to consider these a success.  I guess that depends on what you want to do with them.  They are the easiest and most robust units I have tested and worked where no others would.  Other than the silly initial screen where you can not read the text, their software worked extremely well and was very easy to use.  When connected, the connection was very consistent.  Since you can hook 4 devices to one adapter, they are well suited for an AV rack where you can stream your VOD, update your guide data, or update firmware on your AV devices.

On the negative side, the performance was not very good for HD video streaming.  If all you want is to connect to the internet or stream lower resolution content, these will work out very well since the signal is more consistent than wireless.  However if you are looking to stream Blu-Ray content, crawl in the attic and start running Cat 6 as these are not going to work for you.  They market these for streaming HD and I would say that is a bit of stretch.  If you consider HD to be 720P with low to mid bit rates than yes, but if your version of HD (as mine is) is 1080P with a 20+ Mbs bit rate than no, these will not stream HD.  Don’t get me wrong, these are best powerline adapter I have tested but you should know in advance what you are going to use them for.  To me the powerline adapter technology is still inconsistent and is very dependent on your house wiring.  There are newer more powerful units that may be worth trying but as far as these go, be clear on what your needs are before you shop.  If you need multiple devices on one adapter then there is value to these, but if you want blazing speed, look elsewhere.