| Snap Appliance Snap Server 1100 - Page 7 of 7 |
Performance and Results:
Benchmarking the Snap Server’s performance was not as easy as I anticipated. After mapping the Snap Server to a network drive I attempted to use a “File System Benchmark” under SiSoft Sandra but after letting the benchmark run for more than thirty minutes, the only result was a “not responding” SiSoft Sandra program. With this failure I had to consider another way to accurately benchmark the device.
I decided this was best accomplished by configuring the FTP Snap Server and then recording the upload/download times for transferring a 479MB compressed file over the 10/100 local network. To keep the results as accurate as possible, all other computers on the network were turned off during testing and no applications other than Smart FTP (the free FTP client used during testing) was running on the test system.
After enabling the FTP Server on the device we had one minor issue. As you can see in the logs below it seemed some command had been making it impossible for the client to connect successfully to the server. Upon closer inspection we learned the “Directory Listing Options” (Show All Files, and Resolve Links) were preventing the proper connection. After these options were disabled in the SmartFTP, the client was able to successfully access the Snap Server’s FTP Server.
 
After this small issue was addressed, the speed tests were started. Below are the screen shots of the test results involving downloading from and uploading to the Snap Server. As you can see, the download average speed to transfer 479MB from the Snap Server to the test computer was 8,326.71KB/s (8.3MB/s) in 59 seconds. The upload on the other hand was a bit slower, with an average transfer rate being 5,712.51KB/s (5.7MB/s) in 86 seconds. Each of these transfer rates is very respectable, especially for large file transfers.
 
These results look impressive, but without something to compare to they are nearly meaningless. For a fair comparison, the same 479MB file will be transferred on the same network to and from a Windows 2000 Server (with the FTP server service installed). The results weren’t too surprising; the Windows 2000 Server took the lead downloading at 11,425.03 KB/s (11.4MB/s) in 43 seconds. The upload was slightly slower, averaging at 8,772.79 KB/s (8.8MB/s) in 56 seconds.
 
Overall, the Snap Server had slower transfers than the dedicated Windows 2000 Server. We determined based on these results during FTP downloads; the Snap Server was 27% slower than the Windows 2000 machine. During our upload test, the Snap Server further decreases in transfer speed, being about 35% slower than the Windows 2000 Server.
Windows Share Benchmark Test:
It was also determined the Snap Server should be compared to the same Windows 2000 Server to see how quickly each server could download and upload our 479MB file. Each server was mapped through the network to a drive letter. The amount of time taken to upload and download was then manually taken with a stopwatch and recorded.
The Snap Server download to the client took 97 seconds. Uploading from client to the Snap Server took 124 seconds. The Windows 2000 Server on the other hand had a download time of 62 seconds and took 72 seconds to upload. These results show the Snap Server getting beat once again by the Windows 2000 Server, this time by even a greater percentage. During the download tests, the Snap Server was 36% slower than the Windows 2000 Server. Uploads were even worse, nearly 42% slower than the Windows 2000 Server. As you can see, the Snap Server is considerably slower for file transfers, but keep in mind for a 3.5 lbs piece of equipment, the Snap Server’s performance is still very practical.
Conclusion:
The 80GB Snap Server 1100 by Snap Appliance is a great network storage device if you can appreciate the cost. The device is easy to install and requires very little configuration to setup a network share, FTP, or web server. The devices ability to operate in a mixed networking environment is a huge bonus, especially for small businesses that might use a combination of UNIX and Windows workstations. Businesses will also appreciate that the Snap Server requires very little IT knowledge or support, keeping costs down. A quick search on PriceGrabber revealed the 80GB Snap Server 1100 can be purchased for roughly $500 (US).
The Snap Appliance Snap Server 1100 is a great product that I would recommend especially to small businesses that have few IT resources. It is more difficult however to suggest home users purchase this unit due to its high cost. Most computer enthusiasts would rather build a more expandable computer for about the same price. Other than the high price the Snap Server 1100 makes for great network storage, earning 4/5 stars... “Recommended”!
Final Rating (4 out of 5 stars):
Pros:
• Quick setup and easy web-based management
• Portable, taking up very little space and weighing only 3.5 pounds
• Compatible with a variety of networking environments
• Can serve as an automated backup/recovery device
• Requires no user licenses like other servers
• Simple and fast FTP and Web Server
• Obviously lower power consumption than the typical server
Cons:
• High price for 80GB of network storage for individuals
• Cannot be upgraded (Snap Appliance suggests just buying another)
• Results showed the Snap Server FTP transfers were up to 35% slower than a Windows 2000 FTP Server, and up to 42% slower when transferring over Network shares.
Special Thanks to Snap Appliance for providing the Snap Server 1100 to BigBruin.Com for review!
Please drop by the BigBruin.Com Forum and feel free to discuss this review.
Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7
Home | Forum | Review Index
|
|
|
|
