PCIE 3.0 controller a waste in a PCIE 2.0 system?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

brashquido

Distinguished
Nov 26, 2009
6
0
18,510
Hi All,

I have an old X58 based system with an i7 920 CPU I am using for my lab environment. I am looking to upgrade my storage config in this server and am trying to ascertain if it is worth spending extra on something like an LSI 9271-8i, or just saving my money and getting an LSI 9260-8i.

My disk config will be one of the following;

1) 8 x HGST 4TB Ultrastar 7K4000

2) 2 x Samsung 512GB 840 Pro SSD (CacheCade)
6 x HGST 4TB Ultrastar 7K4000

Is either of these two configs going to be able to generate enough IOPs to saturate the older (and cheaper) LSI 9260-8i?
 
Solution
spooky2th
Lot's of users are having problems with SSD's in the old X58 systems because they are not compatible. Those MBs were before SSDs were around. Using the PCIe controller might work though.
Sort by date Sort by votes
B

brashquido

Distinguished
Nov 26, 2009
6
0
18,510
I have a Samsung 840 in this system connected to the onboard ICH10R as the boot disk at the moment which hasn't had an issue.

Have found a few forum discussions from around the web saying that you'd struggle to saturate PCIE 2.0 using purely mechanical HDD's. This suggest that a LSI 9260-8i would be all I need for config option 1.

Not sure about config option 2 though which is what I was leaning toward.

a) Is the 9260-8i enough for this CacheCade setup?

b) Is the PCIE 2.0 bandwidth going to be a limitation if I decide to spend the extra on a 9271-8i?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

brashquido

Distinguished
Nov 26, 2009
6
0
18,510
Ok, have done some more reading. It appears that;

1) PCIE 2.0 is rated at 500MB/s per lane (each direction). In my system this would cap both the 9260 and 9271 at 4.0GB/s being 8x PCIE cards.

2) The only "real world" performance data I've been able to find is in a review on SSDReview claiming a read of 2.5GB/s and 1.7GB/s write for sequential data on the 9260 and 2.7GB/s and 3.3GB/s write for the same on the 9265 (uses same RoC as the 9271).

3) If point 2 is correct, then it would seem the PCIE 2.0 issue as irrelevant as neither card can saturate the bandwith.

4) On the IOPS side of thing the numbers I've been able to find (with FastPath enabled) is 150k for the 9260 & 465K for the 9271.

5) If point 4 is correct, then the SSD's and configuration (RAID 1 for CacheCade) I plan to use would not saturate either card as the Samsung 840 Pro's are rated at around 90k~100k IOPs for 4k random reads.

Going on this the much cheaper 9260 is going to be ample for anything I'm going to be able to throw at it with my disk config.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom