Kingwin DM-2535U3 Dock Master ReviewIndybird - August 30, 2010
» Discuss this article (0)
To test the Kingwin Dockmaster we’ll be using standard hard drive benchmarks. Included in these tests are HDTune, SiSoft Sandra and windows file transfers using real files. For comparison the drive will be tested using a direct internal SATA connection. The Dockmaster only has a USB 3.0 connection and since USB 3.0 is backwards compatible it will also be tested with USB 2.0. The test drive is freshly formatted and defragmented, so the results will not be skewed by uneven and/or indexed data.
- Processor: AMD Phenom II X4 955 BE
- Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P
- Motherboard: ASUS M4A89GTD USB3
- Memory: Mushkin Blackline 996782 PC3 12800 2x2GB
- Video Card: Palit Geforce GTX 260
- Power Supply: OCZ 700W Modular Power Supply
- Hard Drive: 1 x Seagate 750GB SATA
- Optical Drive: Lite-on DVD-RW SATA
- OS: Windows Vista Ultimate 64-Bit
- Average Transfer Rate (HD Tune)
- Access Time (HD Tune)
- Burst Rate (HD Tune)
- CPU Usage (HD Tune)
- Physical Disk Drive Index (SiSoft Sandra)
- Physical Disk Access Time (SiSoft Sandra)
- File Systems Drive Index (SiSoft Sandra)
- File Systems Access Time (SiSoft Sandra)
- 10/100/500MB Real World Transfer Time
HD tune is designed to measure disk performance and performance impact on windows. It is typically used to benchmark drives and disk controllers.
Sandra is a full pc benchmarking suite. Among these are four tests designed for hard drives that we’ll be running here.
Real World Transfer Time:
A 10MB, 100MB and 500MB are copied from the system drive to the test drive; the time it takes to copy is measured with a stopwatch.
Over USB 3.0 the Kingwin Dock Master performs very well. In HDtune the average transfer rates and burst rates were 77% and 69% (respectively) of the full internal SATA speed. Though the CPU Utilization was higher, 14% is nothing to worry about. The access time was almost spot on, but USB has never been a particularly high latency connection. Moving over to Sandra, the results were even better. Physical Disk and File System Drive Indexing and access times were all within 90% of the SATA speeds. Strangely though the Windows file transfers tell another story. The file transfers typically took double the amount of time as it did on the internal SATA, and though this is a pretty decent improvement over USB 2.0, it still leaves a bit to be desired considering the benchmarked gains. Speaking of USB 2.0, it is clear that USB 3.0 is a much higher bandwidth connection. The USB 2.0 seemed a little disappointing actually when compared to USB 3.0.
During all of these tests I noticed that the hard drive got fairly hot. Nothing alarming, but probably not ideal either. A small fan blowing air over the drive could solve this issue with a minimal amount of effort.