VIA or Promise Controller for non-RAID SATA HD

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Recently had 2 PCs built by a local shop. Win XP SP2, each with identical Asus
K8V SE Deluxe MOBOs and single 160 GB Seagate SATA hard drives in each PC. I
recently realized that on one PC the HD is connected to the VIA controller, and
on the other it is connected to the Promise controller.

My question is, is one setup "better" than the other in terms of performance,
all other things being equal?
5 answers Last reply
More about promise controller raid sata
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Michael Meyers wrote:
    > Recently had 2 PCs built by a local shop. Win XP SP2, each with identical Asus
    > K8V SE Deluxe MOBOs and single 160 GB Seagate SATA hard drives in each PC. I
    > recently realized that on one PC the HD is connected to the VIA controller, and
    > on the other it is connected to the Promise controller.
    >
    > My question is, is one setup "better" than the other in terms of performance,
    > all other things being equal?

    You tell us, you seem to have a pretty good benchmarking environment :-p

    I would guess the VIA, marginally.

    Ben
    --
    A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
    Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
    I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Sat, 07 May 2005 23:29:50 +0100, Ben Pope <benpope81@_REMOVE_gmail.com>
    wrote:

    >Michael Meyers wrote:
    >> Recently had 2 PCs built by a local shop. Win XP SP2, each with identical Asus
    >> K8V SE Deluxe MOBOs and single 160 GB Seagate SATA hard drives in each PC. I
    >> recently realized that on one PC the HD is connected to the VIA controller, and
    >> on the other it is connected to the Promise controller.
    >>
    >> My question is, is one setup "better" than the other in terms of performance,
    >> all other things being equal?
    >
    >You tell us, you seem to have a pretty good benchmarking environment :-p
    >
    >I would guess the VIA, marginally.
    >
    >Ben

    Sorry, I forgot to mention, my PC has an Athlon 64 3400+ and OCZ RAM, and my
    son's has an Athlon 64 2800+ and "generic" RAM, so they're not identical
    systems. But I want to maximize performance in each, hence the question about
    which controller is "better".
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <p2hq71ddpaii2l9funr6nfn3agbr7mhnv6@4ax.com>, Michael Meyers
    <meyers@shaw.ca> wrote:

    > On Sat, 07 May 2005 23:29:50 +0100, Ben Pope <benpope81@_REMOVE_gmail.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Michael Meyers wrote:
    > >> Recently had 2 PCs built by a local shop. Win XP SP2, each with
    identical Asus
    > >> K8V SE Deluxe MOBOs and single 160 GB Seagate SATA hard drives in
    each PC. I
    > >> recently realized that on one PC the HD is connected to the VIA
    controller, and
    > >> on the other it is connected to the Promise controller.
    > >>
    > >> My question is, is one setup "better" than the other in terms of
    performance,
    > >> all other things being equal?
    > >
    > >You tell us, you seem to have a pretty good benchmarking environment :-p
    > >
    > >I would guess the VIA, marginally.
    > >
    > >Ben
    >
    > Sorry, I forgot to mention, my PC has an Athlon 64 3400+ and OCZ RAM, and my
    > son's has an Athlon 64 2800+ and "generic" RAM, so they're not identical
    > systems. But I want to maximize performance in each, hence the question about
    > which controller is "better".

    There is some P.R. material here. It compares the 8237 to
    one of the Promise controllers. The claim is, the internal
    bus in the 8237 is not constrained by the PCI bus.

    http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/southbridge/vt8237/drivestation.jsp

    Note that accepting benchmarks from P.R. material is
    not a real good thing to do, so perhaps if you look in
    the private forums, you can get more realistic numbers.

    For example, if the PCI latency timer is cranked up on a
    motherboard, a disk controller can achieve much higher
    disk benchmarks, but with the danger of unfairness amongst
    all the PCI cards. If you are using a PCI sound card, it could
    be starved for data by the disk controller, and suffer an
    underrun. In the real world, system operation must be adjusted
    so all peripherals can operate properly, and this condition would
    not give as good a disk benchmark.

    You could test your two machines with Sisoft Sandra or Hdtach,
    to do your own benchmarking. That testing will be much more
    meaningful, since it is done on the target hardware.

    HTH,
    Paul
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    I had the p4p800d with the via controler and raid-0 and I was quite
    impressed with it. However, the board failed and the replacement
    P4P800e with the promise controler is currently running quite well too
    (raid-0), but it doesn't seem as fast. Unfortunatly, I wasn't able to
    benchmark the other board before returning it...


    On Sat, 07 May 2005 23:29:50 +0100, Ben Pope
    <benpope81@_REMOVE_gmail.com> wrote:

    >Michael Meyers wrote:
    >> Recently had 2 PCs built by a local shop. Win XP SP2, each with identical Asus
    >> K8V SE Deluxe MOBOs and single 160 GB Seagate SATA hard drives in each PC. I
    >> recently realized that on one PC the HD is connected to the VIA controller, and
    >> on the other it is connected to the Promise controller.
    >>
    >> My question is, is one setup "better" than the other in terms of performance,
    >> all other things being equal?
    >
    >You tell us, you seem to have a pretty good benchmarking environment :-p
    >
    >I would guess the VIA, marginally.
    >
    >Ben
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Sun, 08 May 2005 02:12:30 GMT, timmy <bs@aol.com> wrote:

    >I had the p4p800d with the via controler and raid-0 and I was quite
    >impressed with it. However, the board failed and the replacement
    >P4P800e with the promise controler is currently running quite well too
    >(raid-0), but it doesn't seem as fast. Unfortunatly, I wasn't able to
    >benchmark the other board before returning it...
    >
    >
    >
    >On Sat, 07 May 2005 23:29:50 +0100, Ben Pope
    ><benpope81@_REMOVE_gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Michael Meyers wrote:
    >>> Recently had 2 PCs built by a local shop. Win XP SP2, each with identical Asus
    >>> K8V SE Deluxe MOBOs and single 160 GB Seagate SATA hard drives in each PC. I
    >>> recently realized that on one PC the HD is connected to the VIA controller, and
    >>> on the other it is connected to the Promise controller.
    >>>
    >>> My question is, is one setup "better" than the other in terms of performance,
    >>> all other things being equal?
    >>
    >>You tell us, you seem to have a pretty good benchmarking environment :-p
    >>
    >>I would guess the VIA, marginally.
    >>
    >>Ben

    Thank you all for your input.
Ask a new question

Read More

Asus NAS / RAID Controller SATA Motherboards