ICH9R + 3TB Drives + Raid5 + Additional OS Drive. Need some help

I just purchased 5 3TB Hitachi hard drives, and they work fine in single drive format, bios and windows both see the drives as 3TB. My goal is to setup a Raid 5 with these 5 drives, and have the 6th port on my mobo be a single OS drive.

Motherboard: Abit IP35 Pro
Southbridge: ICH9R (Intel Matrix Storage v7.5.0.1017)


My problem is when I enable the raid option in bios the Intel Matrix Storage Manager see's the 3TB drives as 801GB (common problem), meanwhile the drives work fine in single ide mode in both Bios and Windows 7 x64. I am at a loss of what to do since updating the drivers can only be done during a windows installation, and that will build a 2300gb Raid array, but I am unable to install windows.

So I have tried removing 3TB Drive, adding a CDROM, putting the bios in RAID Mode, and it refuses to let the computer boot to the cdrom so I can not install windows. (I though that removing a 3TB drive and adding a CDROM I could build a 4 Drive Raid5 +CDROM +OS Drive, to update the drivers then when everything is running, replace the cdrom with the other 3TB drive and re-build the array.)


I am at a loss of what to try now...can someone please help me
17 answers Last reply
More about ich9r drives raid5 additional drive help
  1. paradiss said:
    I just purchased 5 3TB Hitachi hard drives, and they work fine in single drive format, bios and windows both see the drives as 3TB. My goal is to setup a Raid 5 with these 5 drives, and have the 6th port on my mobo be a single OS drive.

    Motherboard: Abit IP35 Pro
    Southbridge: ICH9R (Intel Matrix Storage v7.5.0.1017)


    My problem is when I enable the raid option in bios the Intel Matrix Storage Manager see's the 3TB drives as 801GB (common problem), meanwhile the drives work fine in single ide mode in both Bios and Windows 7 x64. I am at a loss of what to do since updating the drivers can only be done during a windows installation, and that will build a 2300gb Raid array, but I am unable to install windows.

    So I have tried removing 3TB Drive, adding a CDROM, putting the bios in RAID Mode, and it refuses to let the computer boot to the cdrom so I can not install windows. (I though that removing a 3TB drive and adding a CDROM I could build a 4 Drive Raid5 +CDROM +OS Drive, to update the drivers then when everything is running, replace the cdrom with the other 3TB drive and re-build the array.)


    I am at a loss of what to try now...can someone please help me



    I just read a post

    "The latest Intel Rapid Storage does not have support for 3tb hard disk drives on RAID mode. Only for AHCI. Future releases of the Intel® Rapid Storage software will support >2TB hard drives on RAID. "

    Looks like i am SOL, stuck with 5 useless 3TB Drives... UGH
  2. paradiss said:
    I just read a post

    "The latest Intel Rapid Storage does not have support for 3tb hard disk drives on RAID mode. Only for AHCI. Future releases of the Intel® Rapid Storage software will support >2TB hard drives on RAID. "

    Looks like i am SOL, stuck with 5 useless 3TB Drives... UGH



    Not quite!

    Use the SATA 1 to 5 RAID controller SPM394 or SPM393, that I used then you can create a 12TB raid5 in 45sec
  3. FireWire2 - I'm not challenging you, but hoping you are right. Have you ever used one of those marvelous devices with disks that large?
  4. Yes, an add- on RAID controller will solve your problem. I'm unfamiliar with the brand that was previously recommended, and there are quite a few choices. "Good" ones aren't cheap, though.
  5. Not personally, that I use 3TB to create 15TB, but other did

    I have only 5x 2TB configure as RAID5, usable 8TB
    Here are my RAID GUI configurations



    As you can see I have raid5 setup

    I also use the email notification, to alert/notify me by email




    You can see at this thread:
    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1086218&page=3
    post # 57

    Sarge set up 12TB out of 15TB (5.x3.0TB) with the same controller
  6. Firewire2 - that device just keeps looking better and better.
  7. FireWire2 said:
    Not quite!

    Use the SATA 1 to 5 RAID controller SPM394 or SPM393, that I used then you can create a 12TB raid5 in 45sec



    Not sure if you read my first post, but I am trying to use my Motherboards on board Raid5 for this. Trying to not spend another $500 on a controller card.
  8. paradiss said:
    Not sure if you read my first post, but I am trying to use my Motherboards on board Raid5 for this. Trying to not spend another $500 on a controller card.


    A new version of Intel RST wont make a difference in the BIOS (only after you installed Windows), you do need an add-on RAID controller to use these drives.

    There are cheaper RAID controllers but they are lacking in features
  9. paradiss said:
    Not sure if you read my first post, but I am trying to use my Motherboards on board Raid5 for this. Trying to not spend another $500 on a controller card.


    Well you have an option:

    a - wait for the BIOS/Software update from Intel - this may take a long time
    or
    b - Use $119.00 this SATA controller, in ever way is better than Mobo raid

    I would buy it from Amazon - No Tax - I love Amazon :-).


    WyomingKnott
    Quote:
    Firewire2 - that device just keeps looking better and better.


    Yeah, I was skeptical about this controller, but after try it for with clients... I'm sold. Any client needs about 200~450MB/sec I would use this controller.

    It does not matter whether what OS I use, Linux, MAC or Windows it just works
  10. Any suggested retailer for the SPM394 or SPM393, reading up on them.

    Nevermind that question, just noticed you suggested Amazon.
  11. FireWire2,with a little researching i am seeing a post made about the controller, which i presume would be from you since its by FireWire2.


    http://www.allquests.com/question/4087490/lower-power-storage-server.html


    Can this SPM393 device only put out 55MB/s?
  12. If you look at the post... It's refer to built a NAS base in ITX-220 and FreeNAS... data transfer via Ethernet connection...

    It's not a DAS... The transfer rate is controlled by SMB network protocol, freeNAS and ITX-220

    NAS is always slower than DAS :-)

    As a Media Server, which can deliver 55MB/sec. It means you can comfortable stream three or four full HD 1080p through out the house

    Just FYI I did a 40TB Media Server, which only consumes 180W of power base on SPM39x
  13. FireWire2 said:
    If you look at the post... It's refer to built a NAS base in ITX-220 and FreeNAS... data transfer via Ethernet connection...

    It's not a DAS... The transfer rate is controlled by SMB network protocol, freeNAS and ITX-220

    NAS is always slower than DAS :-)

    As a Media Server, which can deliver 55MB/sec. It means you can comfortable stream three or four full HD 1080p through out the house

    Just FYI I did a 40TB Media Server, which only consumes 180W of power base on SPM39x


    Not related to the OP but did you try increasing the MTU size of your NICS. I found an MTU (Packet size) of 1500 was to small, I went up to 4k and I got much more throughput on Gige I was shocked.
  14. Really! I have to try it out... you mean MTU=4500?

    The MAX MTU i ever tried is 10240... Would you mind explain it a little more detail... TIA
  15. FireWire2 said:
    Really! I have to try it out... you mean MTU=4500?

    The MAX MTU i ever tried is 10240... Would you mind explain it a little more detail... TIA


    Depending on the network and the cards I have had some negative effects going to high >7-8k. When your max packet size is 1500bytes, you naturally have to send more smaller packets in addition those smaller packets create quite some overhead. On my NICs (Intel PRO/100 MT Dual Port Server adapter) I use a Jumbo Packet (same thing different name) as 4088bytes When I tried 16128bytes it didnt work properly.

    I did a test a few days ago, when my Jumbo Packet was disabled (MTU of 1500) transfer between two computer was about 60MB/s, increased it to 4k and was pushing 90-100MB/s.

    As per wiki:
    Quote:
    The original 1500-byte payload size for Ethernet frames was used because of the high error rates and low speed of communications. Thus, if one receives a corrupted packet, only 1500 bytes (plus 18 bytes for the frame header and other overhead) must be re-sent to correct the error. However, each frame requires that the network hardware and software process it. If the frame size is increased, the same amount of data can be transferred with less effort. This reduces CPU utilization (mostly due to interrupt reduction) and increases throughput by allowing the system to concentrate on the data in the frames, instead of the frames around the data.


    I havent had any issues mixing 4088 byte jumbo frames with 1500 byte ones on my network.

    I hate linking to PDF's but look on Page 5 of the PDF (labeled page 3 in the document)
    http://docs.hp.com/en/783/jumbo_final.pdf

    I would try 4k on both NAS and one receiving machine see what happens get a large file to transfer (couple hundred megs to a gig)
  16. Ah! I see the different...

    Your number is 90~100mb/sec, or roughly 9~10MB/sec. Where my current NAS is 55MB/sec or roughly 550mb/s. This is 5.5 times as fast...
    I was able to tune it up to 75MB/sec (750mb/s)
  17. I meant 90-100MB/s so 900mbits + I didnt capitalize properly, edited it so its fixed now.
Ask a new question

Read More

NAS / RAID BIOS Storage