Product Reviews

Announced by HP, IBM and Seagate in 1997, the LTO (linear tape open) specification defines an open standard that allows media to be interchanged across different vendors' backup products. This aims to overcome the problem facing network administrators when choosing the hardware for their backup strategy as it allows them to select a tape format that doesn't tie them to a particular manufacturer. A tape created on one vendor's LTO tape drive can be used on any other compliant tape drive, so simplifying the buying process.

Ultrium is one implementation of the LTO specification, and HP's Ultrium 230e (reviewed issue 79, p244) impressed us with its 100Gb of native storage capacity and high backup speeds during performance tests. The Viper 200 is Seagate's first Ultrium-format tape drive and, although it was originally

ADVERTISEMENT

announced in February 2000, it's taken until now to get my hands on one. As expected, it employs the same technology as the Ultrium 230e and adds a unique feature called dynamic powerdown. The Viper maintains a small amount of stored power that's used to gently slow the supply and take-up reels to a full stop in the event of a power failure.

To test the Viper 200, I used exactly the same Windows 2000 Server system as for HP's drive. However, during the performance tests the Viper proved to be more erratic and noticeably slower. Under ARCServe 2000 and Veritas Backup Exec, it secured the 8.2Gb of test data at a rate of 713Mbytes/min and 706Mbytes/min respectively. It's certainly fast, but the 230e averaged 850Mbytes/min and 842Mbytes/min for the same tasks. A full restoration of the test data returned only 581Mbytes/min and 571Mbytes/min - a drop of around 20 per cent over the 230e. ARCServe's full tape-to-disk verification was completed at an average of 715Mbytes/min while, bizarrely, Backup Exec's tape read test returned a whopping 1,053Mbytes/min.

There's no denying the Viper 200 is fast, as it outstrips most mid-range backup devices currently on the market. However, HP's Ultrium 230e wasn't only faster during testing but also produced more consistent results. There's little difference in price between the two internal drives so, for the moment, HP's Ultrium drive looks the firm favourite.