ICY DOCK has been around for over 12 years now and although they are not a household name, if you have shopped for drive enclosures there is a good chance you have noticed them. In fact, drive enclosures is their one and only business. They specialize in providing a complete lineup of internal and external drive enclosures utilizing various interface technologies. It should not be surprising that they were one of the first companies to market an external enclosure with a eSATA interface.

We recently purchased a couple of their latest models to use in our daily operations and for an upcoming enclosure roundup. However, we were impressed enough with the ICY DOCK MB559US series to provide a review of the 1SMB model today along with on overview of the storage technology utilized in this product.

As hard drive transfer rates have continued to increase, and people have increased their reliance on external hard drive enclosures, the bandwidth limitations of USB have become obvious. Even improvements to the FireWire architecture have been unable to satisfy power users, who have long since begun to clamor for single or multiple hard drives in a non-SCSI external enclosure. Enter eSATA.

eSATA, Firewire and USB Comparison
	eSATA	FireWire 800 (1394b)	USB 2.0
Peak Transfer Rate (MB/sec)	300	100	60
Cable Length (M)	2	4.5	5
Daisy Chain Capable	No	Yes	Yes

Ratified in 2004, the eSATA standard seeks to overcome some of the inherent disadvantages of SCSI (bulkier cabling and connectors, relatively expensive drive price points, etc), while improving on many of the technical shortcomings of USB and FireWire. While suffering from a comparatively short 2 meter cable length restriction, eSATA provides a long sought-after external high performance bus, capable of keeping pace with fairly large RAID arrays. The connector, an often-cited complaint from USB or early SATA adopters, addresses the problem of devices disconnecting too easily, employing a simple retention mechanism which keeps the cable connected to the drive more securely. Cables are far more end-user friendly and flexible compared to SCSI, even with the added shielding compared to its internal SATA cousin.

In addition to the faster bus speed, eSATA enjoys the benefits of sharing a common bus architecture with its devices: Where USB and 1394 have to convert or encapsulate data on the fly in converting from ATA to their native protocols, eSATA does not. As this overhead can easily rob 15% of the bandwidth of those busses, the advantages behind eSATA are obvious. The primary reason for eSATA is external storage since eSATA offers the same interface speeds as SATA. In theory, this technology should and generally does eliminate any performance differences between internal and external drives.

Beyond everything discussed above, eSATA is functionally the same as its internal SATA cousin. Power is supplied via an external source as in internal SATA (rather than in USB, where power and data transfer occur over the same cable), it uses the same four data line communication as internal SATA, and all relevant technologies and feature sets (S.M.A.R.T, drive spinup/spindown, NCQ, etc) are supported although implementation is dependent upon the manufacturer. eSATA drives are recognized as normal drives in the BIOS, which means they can be easily used to boot Windows.

The question, however, is one of value. USB connectors, for example, are on virtually every motherboard sold today. In contrast, there are only a limited number of motherboards on the market today that offer native eSATA capabilities. However, the growth in external devices to take advantage of the additional feature set and improved bandwidth of the eSATA bus is increasing rapidly now. The main question that comes to mind is if these differences are useful in the real world?

In our review today of the ICY DOCK MB559US-1SMB, we will provide a few answers to this question. Let's now find out how ICY DOCK's latest eSATA drive enclosure performs against its internal SATA cousin.



ICY DOCK Specifications

ICY DOCK MB559US-1SMB Specifications
Host Interface	eSATA + USB 2.0 Combination
Drive Type	3.5" SATA 1.5Gb/s or 3Gb/s Interface
Drive Position	Vertical or Horizontal
Transfer Rates	Up to 3Gb/s per eSATA specs Up to 480Mb/s per USB 2.0 specs
Connection Type	SATA
Structure Type	Aluminum Body with Plastic Trim
Drive Cooling	Passive via Aluminum frame heat dispersion with ventilation ports
Activity Indicators	Device Power and Drive Activity via LED
OS Support	Windows 98/SE/ME/2000/XP/Vista, Mac OS 9.0 or higher
Power Draw	2W
Dimensions (LxWxH)	194 x 142.6 x 42.6 mm
Weight	1.10 lbs.

The ICY DOCK MB559US-1SMB provides full support for current eSATA and USB 2.0 specifications along with a case design that features horizontal or vertical positioning. If your system does not natively provide eSATA connections, no worry as ICY DOCK provides an adapter bracket that converts an internal SATA header into an eSATA header that is mounted in an open slot. A USB 2.0 connection is also included for those systems that do not support eSATA or for people on the go who can use this almost universal interface.

ICY DOCK Feature Set


The MB559US features two different color schemes at this time. Not pictured is a brushed silver design with off-white plastic trim that would remind one of the latest Apple designs. Our review sample is the recently released glossy piano black design that looks stunning. Well, at least until it spent a few days in the lab being handled several dozen times and ended up looking like a finger print collection unit. A buffing cloth and a small dab of auto polish brought the unit's glossy black shine back in no time.


The MB559US enclosure does not include a cooling fan and instead relies on a combination of convection cooling and chassis conduction to cool the enclosed hard drive. It can be positioned either horizontally or vertically, but we found the vertical position to offer less noise, vibration, and heat.


The connections on the back panel are common for this type of enclosure: a power plug that attaches to the external power brick, USB 2.0 and eSATA connections, a button to release the four plastic feet for vertical operation, and a power switch. Interestingly enough, the power switch refused to operate when both of the USB and eSATA connections were filled.


The process of removing the drive the caddy is straightforward. One press of the front button is all that is needed to release the drive, which then slides out easily. Reinserting the drive is just as simple with the only caveat being the lever should be fully extended before pushing the caddy back into place. Once this is done then you close and lock the lever arm.

ICY DOCK has made it easy to swap drives as the caddy utilized is compatible with other enclosures manufactured by them. Besides making the swappable drive process very easy, it also simplifies drive installation since it can be installed in a caddy ahead of time before going in the enclosure. Additional caddy units are available for sale and range in price from around $16 for the silver/white unit to $19 for the black unit.


A quick look at the inside of the unit reveals a spartan PCB layout containing the controller chipset along with the standard SATA data and power connectors.


The accessory kit has everything you need to attach the unit to a system with an eSATA or high-speed USB 2.0 port. If your motherboard does not have an eSATA port, you can use the included bracket for attachment to the motherboard's SATA connector. We did not notice any performance or compatibility issues utilizing this method with our test system.

However, if your motherboard's controller chipset does not fully support the eSATA protocol there might be issues using the SATA to eSATA bracket. If this is the case, there might be data corruption if the error correction algorithms do not properly address the communication signal synchronization between the two standards. We have also seen on older controllers like the Intel ICH6 or early VIA chipsets without eSATA support that enabling write-back caching for the drive within Windows will cause data corruption or a locked drive.



Hardware Setup

Standard Test Bed Playback of iPEAK Trace Files and Test Application Results
Processor	Intel QX6700 - 2.66GHz Quad Core
Motherboard	DFI Infinity 965-S
RAM	2 x 1GB OCZ Reaper PC2-9200 Settings - DDR2-800 - 3-4-3-9
OS Hard Drive	1 x Western Digital WD1500 Raptor - 150GB
System Platform Drivers	Intel 8.1.1.1010 Intel Matrix RAID 6.2.1.1002
Video Card	1 x MSI 8800GTX
Video Drivers	NVIDIA ForceWare 158.19
Optical Drive	Plextor PX-760A, Plextor PX-B900A
Cooling	Tuniq 120
Power Supply	Corsair HX620
Case	Cooler Master CM Stacker 830
Operating System	Windows XP Professional SP2

We are utilizing an Intel QX6700 quad core CPU to ensure we are not CPU limited in our testing. A 2GB memory configuration is standard in our XP test bed as most enthusiasts are currently purchasing this amount of RAM. Our choice of high-range OCZ Reaper PC2-9200 memory offers a very wide range of memory settings with timings of 3-4-3-9 used for our benchmark results.

Our test bed now includes a water-cooled MSI 8800 GTX video card to ensure our game tests are not completely GPU bound and to reduce noise/heat levels. Our video tests are run at 1280x1024 resolution for this article at High Quality settings. All of our tests are run in an enclosed case with a dual optical/hard drive setup to reflect a moderately loaded system platform. Windows XP SP2 is fully updated and we load a clean drive image for each system to keep driver conflicts to a minimum.

The drive is formatted before each test run and five tests are completed on each drive in order to ensure consistency in the benchmark results. The two high and low scores are removed with the remaining score representing our reported result. We utilize the Intel ICH8R SATA ports along with the latest Intel Matrix Storage driver to ensure consistency in our playback results when utilizing NCQ, TCQ, or RAID settings.


Our test drive today will be the Samsung SpinPoint T166 500GB that we recently reviewed. We implemented ACHI (advanced host controller interface) in the BIOS to properly test the hot swap capabilities of this drive enclosure when utilizing the eSATA interface. Without the proper matrix storage driver support and ACHI implementation, hot swapping was not possible with our test bed setup.

HD Tach





In our HD Tach tests the sequential read speed of the eSATA configuration is 67.9 MB/s compared to 67.6 with our internal SATA connection. Random access time is 14.3ms for eSATA compared to 14.1ms for internal SATA. Both results are within the normal test variances for this program. Our burst speed with the eSATA setup averaged 129.7 MB/s compared to 230.4 MB/s with the internal SATA system. We tried several different 3Gb/s SATA drives with the same results and at this time it "appears" the ICY DOCK unit is limited to SATA 150 specifications. We are working with ICY DOCK currently and will update the article shortly. However, this is not a performance issue currently as the capabilities of current SATA drives are far from having the ability to sustain read/write rates above this specification.

Update- We discovered an issue with the Intel Matrix Storage driver version 7.0.0.1020 and our ICY DOCK review sample that prevented true SATA 3Gb/s operation. An update to version 7.5.0.1017 did not work. However, after reinstalling Windows XP-SP2 and installing driver 7.5.0.1017, the unit performed as advertised. We will publish updated HDTach results shortly. There were not any differences in our actual benchmarks other than the normal variance between benchmark runs that is typically +/- .05%.

In our USB 2.0 configuration we see an average sequential read speed of 34.1 MB/s and an random access speed of 14.5ms. The burst speed is 37.7 MB/s which is quite good for this particular setup. Of course the reduction in write and read speeds will affect large file transfers the most as we will see in our benchmarks.

It is important to note that access times, average read rates, and burst rate measurements are basically synthetic measurements, and while important these are not "true" application measurements. There is a great deal of potential bottlenecks elsewhere in the system that can and will affect the true performance of a drive. Although these "benchmarks" are a good indicator of a drive's SATA performance, it is the total make-up of components in the PC that will determine the drive's actual performance.



Acoustics

Our acoustic test utilizes our standard test bed components but we implement Intel's power saving technology and turn off the case fans to isolate as much case noise as possible during testing. Our Corsair power supply is nearly silent in these tests and our MSI 8800GTX video card is water cooled by an external unit to provide a further decrease in our case's ambient noise levels. Our drives are attached to the drive cage with rubber bushings to assist in isolating the noise of the drive and avoid the resulting harmonic changes due to the case design.

Our acoustic tests are designed to measure the decibel levels while the system is at idle and also under load while running the General Hard Disk Drive Usage benchmark within PCMark 2005. We found through trial and error that this particular benchmark produces controlled readings across a wide range of applications within the benchmark. This particular benchmark utilizes 60% reads and 40% writes within the trace playback file.

The measurements are taken at a distance of 5mm from the rear and front of the drive being tested in order to minimize surrounding environmental noise. We have noticed that unless we run a completely silent system in a quiet room that measurements taken from 1m are generally not meaningful due to ambient noise levels. There are exceptions to this rule, but overall most modern desktop drives are quieter now than the other components in the system while under load.

The reported measurements are based on an A-weighted decibel score that measures frequencies similar to the way the human ear responds to sound. We take a total of three measurements for each test. We then subtract the high and low scores and arrive at our findings by reporting the remaining score.



Our Samsung SpinPoint T166 is already an extremely quiet drive at idle and it comes close to remaining that way in the ICY DOCK enclosure. However, since the Icy Dock is not equipped with an internal damping system or acoustic padding, it was naturally louder inside the enclosure. The external drive enclosure basically amplified any drive noise that was already present although subjectively it was difficult to discern any real differences.

Although our measurable test differences were substantial, it was quite difficult to pinpoint the differences in sound from a subjective viewpoint. Maybe all those years of hard rock have ruined our ears but in essence we found the sound emanating from the enclosure to be hollow at idle and heavy seeks having the same effect as your mother whispering loudly at you in church to wake up. It was a booming yet very soft noise that we noticed during the load tests that emphasized seek operations.

Our number one problem is the fact that our Samsung SpinPoint T166 500GB test drive likes to vibrate, in fact it would cause our test case to hum without rubber mounting grommets. The same held true for our Icy Dock enclosure, especially when mounted horizontally, but the vibration induced hum was greatly reduced with the unit in a vertical position. A small amount of vibration noise was still noticeable in this position but was less than than a bare drive mount in our test case. Our base dB(A) level in the room at the time of testing was 25 dB(A).

Thermals

Our thermal tests utilize sensor readings via the S.M.A.R.T. (Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology) capability of the drives and are reported by utilizing the Active SMART 2.42 utility. We also utilize thermal sensors and infrared measurement devices to verify our utility results. We test our drives in an enclosed case environment without the fans operational to simulate temperatures that could conceivably be reached in a near silent SFF or HTPC case design. We typically find the reported numbers drop anywhere from 18% to 25% on average with the case fans operational. Our base temperature level in the room at the time of testing was 25C.



Our Samsung drive basically remained at the same temperature as in our test case indicating that at least with this particular cool running drive that the case is not a hindrance to temperatures. In fact, the enclosure unit only consumes 2W of power at idle or under load which helps to contribute to the low thermal output increases we noticed during testing. We will have full results with additional drives like the WD Raptor and Hitachi 1TB drives in the roundup.



PCMark05 Performance

We are utilizing the HDD test suite within PCMark05 for further comparative hard disk scores as it provides a mixture of actual application results and specific read/write percentages utilized within these programs. It is also a readily available benchmark that others can use for comparative purposes. The program utilizes the RankDisk application within the Intel iPEAK SPT suite of tools to record a trace of disk activity during usage of real world applications. These traces are then replayed to generate performance measurements based upon the actual disk operations within each application. The HDD test suite contains 53% read and 47% write operations with each trace section utilizing varied amounts of read or write operations. Additional information about the test suite can be found in PDF format here PCMark05 whitepaper.





Our overall PCMark05 score indicates the internal SATA connection is less than a percent faster than the eSATA setup and about 74% faster than the USB 2.0 connection. However, in the important application and general hard disk usage tests we see the eSATA setup outperforming the internal SATA configuration with the USB 2.0 system performing well.

Although not shown, our eSATA connection had slightly lower scores in the anti-virus and write sections of the test that caused the lower overall score. Our USB 2.0 setup scored 25.6 in the write test compared to 83.2 for the internal SATA connection. This along with a score of 29.4 compared to 137.2 in the anti-virus tests contributed to the greatly reduced PCMark05 total score.



Application Tests

Our application benchmarks are designed to show application performance results with times being reported in seconds, with lower scores being better. While these tests will show some differences between the drives it is important to understand we are no longer measuring the pure performance of the hard drive but how well our platform performs with each individual drive. The performance of a hard drive is an integral part of the computer platform but other factors such as memory, CPU, core logic, and even driver choice can play a major role in determining how well the hard drive performs in any given task.

AnyDVD 6.1

Our next test has us utilizing the "ripping" function of AnyDVD to copy the Office Space DVD file from our source drive to our test drive. Our DVD features 29 files totaling 7.55GB of data and is an excellent test for determining the write speed of a drive.


We see the eSATA configuration trailing the internal setup by 3 seconds or about 2% slower. The USB 2.0 connection is 45 seconds behind the internal connection which equates to it being 21% slower. This was expected due to the reduced write/read speeds of the USB 2.0 connection.

Game Load Test

Our Sims 2: Open for Business test measures the time it takes to load the initial portion of the game. Our application timer starts when the game icon is initiated until the neighborhood menu appears.


The results are basically the same with our eSATA connection slightly trailing the internal setup and the USB 2.0 configuration finishing about 13% off the pace although the differences are very minor.

Game Level Load

This test centers on the actual loading of a playable level within our game selections. The Battlefield 2 test measures the time it takes to load the Daqing Oilfields level. Our application timer begins when the start single player icon is initiated and ends when the join game icon is visible.


The internal SATA and eSATA setups are equal in this test with the USB 2.0 connection being around 15% slower. Once again, no surprises in this test.

File Copy Performance

Our file copy test measures the time it takes to transfer our test folder that contains 29 files, 1 folder, and has 7.55GB of data from our source drive to the target test drive. This benchmark is disk write intensive and requires a fast storage system. The second test does copies the same folder on the test drive to another folder on the same drive.


We finish our tests with a benchmark that favors pure write speeds. Our eSATA setup trails our internal SATA system by two seconds with the USB 2.0 connection finishing 151 seconds behind due to the limited write speeds of this setup. In actual operating conditions, our USB 2.0 connection averaged around 26.1 MB/s in write speeds in this test compared to 34.1 MB/s in our synthetic HD Tach benchmark.



Quick Take

If you are needing to quickly add portable storage to your personal computer system, PVR, or home network then we believe eSATA is the way to do it at this time. Throughout our testing we found that eSATA operation was transparent in the BIOS and in Windows. As far as the system was concerned, the eSATA drive was no different than an internal SATA setup. Although there were a few performance differences in our test suite between our eSATA and internal SATA setups, they were very minor leading us to the conclusion that there is not a true performance difference between the two formats.

Something we never doubted, but it is nice to have data to back up this belief. We believe the minor differences we noticed were probably due to the utilization of the conversion bracket as our test motherboard did not have a native eSATA connection. We did run the same tests on an ASUS P5K-Deluxe board and only in the Sims2 test was there a difference, which was less than two tenths of a second. In fact, in the Nero Recode tests the eSATA setup finished first both times.


We found that ICY DOCK's MB559US-1SMB performed admirably throughout our test sessions. More importantly this enclosure has not failed us in daily use over the course of the last two months. The quality, fit, documentation, and function of the MB559US-1SMB is absolutely superb. Considering the estimated price of $59.99, we expected no less than this type of operation from this external enclosure.

This does not mean all is perfect with the unit. Our noise measurements singled out our primary problem with the enclosure as sounds that were not immediately noticeable with the bare drive became noticeable once the drive was in the enclosure. This problem was expected as ICY BOX made no attempt was to silence the drive inside the enclosure through acoustic padding or drive mounting isolation. That said, to be fair, the ICY DOCK is no better or worse in this respect than any of its competitors we have tested to date. As a reminder, use this enclosure in the vertical position if you have a drive that likes to vibrate such as our Samsung T166 review unit.

As far as day to day operations, we felt constricted having to lug the external power supply around when utilizing the enclosure on different machines but this is true of any eSATA unit. At times the 1m long eSATA cable restricted our ability to locate the drive in a proper position. The inclusion of a 2m long cable would have been appreciated, especially considering the price. One other problem we had was the fact that our drive would not spin down while in the enclosure. It appears that this power savings feature is not implemented by ICY DOCK in their controller setup, so we needed to power off the unit when it was not going to be utilized.

However, these nuances aside, the ICY DOCK MB559US-1SMB delivers on its promise to provide seamless eSATA support while providing a very good USB 2.0 connection option. It is easy to use and simply does what it is supposed to do all the while looking like an industrial art piece on your desk. We would not hesitate to recommend it at this time. Oh yeah, if you are like us when it comes to handling equipment, we highly suggest a polish cloth or some gloves if you order it in black.