Benchmarking virtualized NVIDIA GRID ..

After reading this article I was using seeker to benchmark my hd partition.
I discovered that in the same hd running seeker on a partition of 20 GB I got 5 ms random access time
while running it on a partition of 1.6 TB I got 14 ms random access time.
I gave a look at the seeker code and I found out the point.
Seeker randomly access on the whole hd surface.
So one should compare same capacity hd to have correct comparisons.
Or at least try to access the same "real disk data occupancy" in order to compare the results.
I modified seeker to access always to the first 1 GB of the hd, it is enough to add this line:

Being a digital marketer, I spend my day knee-deep in data
Photo provided by Flickr

As an example, I've tested three different disks, one standard ATA (IDE) drive, and two SCSI disks with different rotational speed:

Disk 1: ATA 120GB, Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 Plus (ST3120026A), 8MB cache, 7200 rpm
Disk 2: SCSI 36GB, Seagate Cheetah 10K.6 (ST336607LC), 8MB cache, 10000 rpm
Disk 3: SCSI 18GB, IBM Ultrastar 36Z15 (IC35L018UCPR15-0), 4MB cache, 15000 rpm

IMPORTANT! When running the below explained benchmarks, your disk should be as idle as possible. Otherwise, you'll get wrong (worse) numbers. Don't run any other disk intensive program at the same time when you are running benchmarks. And, BTW, don't worry about your data, both benchmarks are only reading from disk, meaning, they're not destructive.

4 Tools To Predict and Prevent Hard Drive Failure

Listed below are the best topic suggestions for a thesis data dont drive: benchmarking methods paper dealing with organizational leadership.
Photo provided by Flickr