Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Velociraptors raid 0

Last response: in Storage
Share
August 8, 2009 9:03:17 PM

just curious if these numbers look corrcet burst rate seems low but i am new at this and this is the basic
hd tune read only i think 512kb any help would be appreciated


http://i737.photobucket.com/albums/xx19/fastrak5150/HDT...

More about : velociraptors raid

a b G Storage
August 8, 2009 11:04:42 PM

It's a hair lower than mine, but in the right neighborhood to be sure. As for the burst rate, you can improve performance by downloading the Intel Matrix Storage Console and enabling the write back cache on your RAID volume.
August 9, 2009 7:40:06 AM

cjl said:
It's a hair lower than mine, but in the right neighborhood to be sure. As for the burst rate, you can improve performance by downloading the Intel Matrix Storage Console and enabling the write back cache on your RAID volume.



the hd tune I used was the non payed download just want to be clear and the transfer was 512kb
and I do have the storage matrix just was wondering if that can be used to just improve my current raid 0
without making any changes to it?

thanks for the help,
Related resources
August 9, 2009 8:02:38 AM

Like he said enable write back cache.
a b G Storage
August 9, 2009 9:39:50 AM

Enable the write back cache. It won't change anything on the drives, you won't have to reinstall or anything, and it should slightly boost performance (and massively boost the burst rates)
a c 415 G Storage
August 9, 2009 7:03:10 PM

cjl said:
Enable the write back cache. It won't change anything on the drives, you won't have to reinstall or anything, and it should slightly boost performance (and massively boost the burst rates)

...but you should be aware that enabling the write back cache will expose you to possible data corruption if your system doesn't shut down cleanly due to software crash, hardware failure or power interruption.
a b G Storage
August 10, 2009 2:07:44 AM

True. By default in windows though, some level of write caching is enabled on the OS disk, so it shouldn't hugely increase the risk. I've never had any trouble. (You probably want to disable all write caching when experimenting with new overclock settings though)
a c 415 G Storage
August 10, 2009 8:12:59 AM

cjl said:
True. By default in windows though, some level of write caching is enabled on the OS disk, so it shouldn't hugely increase the risk.
NTFS is pretty robust, but even though write caching can be done for data it does use a specific order of write-through operations when updating critical file system structures. The problem with write caching is that the I/O subsystem could physically write the data in a different order, and if a failure occurs in the middle then it could cause problems.

It's pretty unlikely, but just like in overclocking there's often a tradeoff between performance and reliability. IMHO it makes sense to understand the ramifications of the decisions you're making.
a b G Storage
August 10, 2009 7:12:19 PM

I have 3 in a raid 0 and just tested mine and here is the results (512K):

Minimum 209.9MB/sec
Maximum 342.6MB/sec
Average 282.5MB/sec
Access Time 7.4ms
Burst Rate 2155.3 MB/sec (yes the number is correct)
CPU Usage 1.3%

Motherboard is a P6T Deluxe V2, I7 920 at 3.7G, 12G ram at 8/8/8/22 1458Mhz.

_________________________________________________________
fastrak5150 said:
just curious if these numbers look corrcet burst rate seems low but i am new at this and this is the basic
hd tune read only i think 512kb any help would be appreciated


http://i737.photobucket.com/albums/xx19/fastrak5150/HDT...
a b G Storage
August 10, 2009 11:59:56 PM

The ridiculous burst rate is because you have the write back cache enabled. My pair benches as follows:

Min: 160MB/s
Max: 270MB/s
Avg: 215MB/s
Access time: 7.3ms
Burst rate: 2813.7 MB/s (also known as 2.748 GB/s)
CPU usage: negligible

My burst rate is higher because the intel controller is using system RAM for bursts, rather than anything on the hard drives themselves (since 2.75GB/s is quite a bit faster than you could physically deliver over a pair of 3Gb/s SATA ports). My RAM is 1600 7-8-7-22 compared to your 1458 8-8-8-22, hence the higher burst rates. If write back cache were disabled, it would only be a burst rate from the drives themselves, which is why the OP has vastly lower scores (in fact, the highest burst rate possible on a pair of SATA 3Gb/s drives with no external caching is 600MB/s if they completely saturate both channels of the controller).
!