Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GA-X58A-3UDR & RAID your experience, please

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
July 24, 2010 3:26:55 AM

Hi guys,


Just ditched my GA-P55M-UD2, for the GA-X58A-3UDR. I had my 2 X 1TB drives in RAID 1, for redundancy. (intel raid)


The new setup read it just fine and booted up Win7, however, it is slow as molasses (yes the raid re-built itself, I waited and waited... still garbage). My Windows Disk score went from a "5.9", to a "4.3". My friends single IDE drive on P4 AGP system gets 4.6. I re-installed the drivers and no change in performance. I took out intels Rapid Storage Service, no change.


What are my options with this board? I think I will try RAID 0, since RAID 1 is such a disappointment. Which one is best, so I don't have to re-install my system multiple times. (Also if you can tell my why RAID 1 bites the big one on this board, I am all ears. Would love to just tweak it and keep it in RAID 1).


Is this board a lemon? I can still exchange it... I like gigabyte do they have RAID 1 that works?

a c 177 V Motherboard
July 24, 2010 1:17:21 PM

Please try a pass through the RAID & 'FakeRAID': Speed vs Data Security topic in the 'sticky'
; RAID1 writes will be slower than a single drive in a 'FakeRAID' setup...

BTW - the RAID hardware, software, and RAID BIOS (AKA 'option ROM') have nothing to do with GB - purely Intel products (and be glad of it!) - and are the fastest 'FakeRAID' on the market...
July 24, 2010 2:57:00 PM

I have read that, still does little for me in terms of my problem (I have set up RAID at least 10 times now, without issues). I am mainly intrested in anyone that has this board what their experiences are with Intel RAID 1. Do I have a faulty motherboard, or is this a driver, rom isssue?

Just to give you an idea of what I am dealing with. I networked my i5 with my i7 on GLan network with no traffic to move over my files. I am getting 5Mb/sec reads from the RAID 1 setup. The system is unusable while the copy over the network takes place. The i7 has 6GB installed, and it is crippled by a simple 5Mb/sec copy.


I know Stock Intel RAID is slow compared to other options, but this is not even functional. I just don't understand how gigabyte can realease this crap and even call it RAID. Also keep in mind I went from one Intel Raid to another, byt the same manufacturer. The newer boards implementation is 1/10th the speed at best. That means there is SOMETHING WRONG.


So please if you have the X58A-3UDR, and these are not your experiences with intel RAID 1, let me know so that I can return this board, instead of waiting till some driver guy gets his act together.




Look at the above this is just ridiculous. To start IE or Firefox, takes 5 minutes during this simple copy, where only READING takes place. RAID 1 should be good at reading.

Okay, I just copied and pasted this to Word so I can spell check it. To start word took 5 minutes. To do a simple CTRL-V took 3 minutes from the time I executed the command to the time the text apeared in WORD. Inserting a cursor at spelling mistake took 2 minutes reaction time. This is a brand new i7, 6GB tripple channel. What a piece of crap! (at least intel RAID 1).


Below is an i5 NOT in RAID, single drive SATA, recieving the stream. It doesn't even flinch with the load. This is just for comparison




(BTW, the throughput is obvious, but look closely at the response times of the most active tasks... not looking all that good.)

I think I will do a clean re-install to see if the issue gets solved, that will give me chance to test out all the RAID options on this MB, I will let you guys know what I find. I am still hoping to hear about RAID experiences from users of this board. Thanks.

Related resources
July 24, 2010 4:53:37 PM

Bilbat, thanks for the reply, I did not mean to sound like a dick. Just frustrated with the new MB, need to check the bios still, maybe reflash it just in case there is corruption somewhere.

Lol, problem is I started this copy, and did not stop it, just went to sleep thinking the thing would be done, I wake and there is still 14 hours of wait, lol.


Again, problem could always be driver related, perhaps the new driver did not cleanly install or maybe there correction/adjustment values that don't translate too well from mb switch. (I am just making up bs excuses for the thing, hoping I will find the solution. If I returned everything that gave me setup problems, I probably would be using a mac by now, and I hate macs. Rather know how something works, and tweak it, than use something that intentionally keeps me stupid for my own protection.)


July 24, 2010 5:55:48 PM

(...some comic relief/rant while I work this thing out)


Notice when we copy files over in windows 7, the OS does a calculation based on the current throughput to tell you how long the operation will take. This is quite nice, as I can be told 4 hours and 12 minutes for instance.

Now I decided to copy 420GB on a system that was throughputting 5MB/sec. The algorithm came up "About 1 Day". (you can see this in my first pic) WTF??? What the hell does that mean, how does this help me, how about 25 hours, and 42 minutes? That is way more useful information. Why does Windows have to be like a mac and treat you like a dummy. What programmer over thought this simple analysis?

What if I copied 4 terabytes would the algorithm come out and say "Dude, this will take forever".


LOL, rant off....
a c 177 V Motherboard
July 24, 2010 7:13:33 PM

Ahh - don' worry - I well know how frustrating it can be when something just refuses to work! Just for a vague idea of the 'neighborhood' you should be in, here's a pair of VR's in RAD0:

and a pair of WD RE3's in RAID1:

on an ICH9R... Am in the middle of a garage sale, and a basement flood, so will be a couple hours 'till I can get a look at this, and try to suggest some t'shooting steps...
July 24, 2010 8:56:40 PM

Thanks, that gives me hope.

(I am 8 hours away from being able to do anything with the machine, I started this copy and just don't want to stop it. I know I can probably just attach it to the i5 directly, but at this far in, I am not going to take any chances just in case. Want my data secure first than, I will try every raid mode possibe with my 2 x 1TB Segates 7200.11's, reimage the bios, fresh install, maybe i will even sacrifice a small rodent.)
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 24, 2010 10:48:49 PM

@bilbat ~ I am seeing serious issues with the UD3R MOBO with ANY Intel RAID configurations - period!!! (assuming OP meant "UD3R as a typo vs 3UDR" which I never heard of..)
July 25, 2010 12:29:48 AM

I have Gigabyte EX58-UD3R, a magnificent mobo.
It has many SATA on the Intel X58.
But:
To run a RAID1 mirror with 2 HDs, I recommend you use the 2 Gigabyte SATA2 connectors.
They will run hardware RAID1, and you can access the Gigabyte RAID BIOS at POST (press <Ctrl-G> to enter RAID setup utility).
I know you've been using the Intel, and you're used to it... but you're saying it's not working.
Does your X58 use ICH10R?
It should be the same Intel Matrix Storage drivers...
Note that you require either 32-bit or 64-bit ones.
Try the Gigabyte controller and its setup that is integrated with your system BIOS.
Regards
July 25, 2010 12:30:42 AM

I have that same board with an i7 930 I have raid 0 2x sammy 500GB drives ( waiting on a new 2TB drive for "1" however my throughput is very good on the intel controller. max 270 min 170 avg 230 13.5ms access time although the burst rate says over 3000 ( i think it has got to be a glitch) The_OGS : does the gigabyte controller have higher throughput?
a b V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 12:39:31 AM

The_OGS that will result in worse performance, the Intel controller is king.

To the OP - backup all your data, de-raid the drives, do a zero-write to all the drives and make that RAID array from the ground up again (also perhaps do a full surface scan test on the hdd's too)

There is no problems with Intel RAID, and Gigabyte motherboards.

Also take note RAID1 protects against hardware failure, it doesnt protect against virus's, corruption, deletion etc - far better off with a seperate backup etc.
July 25, 2010 12:41:27 AM

I have the same board, but 2 Intel SSD's in raid 1. No issues, and Win 7 disk score is 7. something (machine is at work right now)
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 12:42:19 AM

I had to RMA (10), yes TEN, with the GA-X58A-UD3R (rev 2); SSD SATA_0 + RAID 1 SATA_2-3. Plus I've seen just in Tom's 4-5 RAID issues with this MOBO.

Question @The_OGS & @Hard Line which version (1 or 2)??
a c 177 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 1:02:09 AM

Please 'point me at' some of these problems; I'd like to look for similarities and possible causes... Just doesn't make any sense to me 'cause an ICH is an ICH, and Intel's gotten 'pretty good at 'em!' I think I mentioned before - I just wonder, due to the XHD thing, if GB s'ware has 'dipped their fingers' in the option ROM code. Have to look at a couple other mfg's manuals. I tried a search at TweakTown, didn't find anything - don't know that I've seen anyhting at Extreme, either - but, usually looking at more outré things, there.
a c 177 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 1:02:20 AM

Please 'point me at' some of these problems; I'd like to look for similarities and possible causes... Just doesn't make any sense to me 'cause an ICH is an ICH, and Intel's gotten 'pretty good at 'em!' I think I mentioned before - I just wonder, due to the XHD thing, if GB s'ware has 'dipped their fingers' in the option ROM code. Have to look at a couple other mfg's manuals. I tried a search at TweakTown, didn't find anything - don't know that I've seen anyhting at Extreme, either - but, usually looking at more outré things, there.
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 1:44:40 AM

@bilbat - My observations so far seem to be the UD3R (rev 2) MOBO's with RAID issues. You've seen the posts here are well as I; I know Intel isn't the issue and not ALL GA MOBOs.
July 25, 2010 1:55:33 AM

I have rev 2 of this board.. AND I am torturing the poor thing with my oc. lol I am using the xhd as well
July 25, 2010 1:57:10 AM

You guys rock! It seems to be the environment, not the hardware.


I attached the drives to another gigabyte board with the same intel raid, and same issue. So I degraded the raid array, and booted with an alternate environment with a degraded drive as an add on.


The transfers are blistering NOW! It is an OS issue after all! Who ever suggested a virus, may be the prize winner. I run a tight ship, but no AV is perfect.


I am sorry for saying anything bad about Gigabyte boards. I seriously love them. They have been a god send to me, considering price and features. I used to be an Asus user, once I got my first gigabyte, never again! So this is such a relief its not the board. I will try the Gigabyte RAID first as it boasts 4x speed in RAID 0 on SATG 3.0 ports. I'll post my scores if that works out.


I have read in other places that I should avoid the Gigabyte Raid as its not as well tested and refined as the intel implementation, if anyone wants to comment on this, I would love to hear your opinions.

Thanks again, will post back with an update.


July 25, 2010 2:02:33 AM

@no1ninja, have you or are you planning to oc? cuz this board got me so far to 4.3 and still have tons of headroom
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 2:10:21 AM

no1ninja said:
You guys rock! It seems to be the environment, not the hardware. So I degraded the raid array, and booted with an alternate environment with a degraded drive as an add on. The transfers are blistering NOW!


Glad to hear your smok'n!

Please explain exactly what you did?? Are you still in RAID 1? Are you still running the XHD/RAID in the BIOs? Did you bench something like ATTO?

Interested to know - thanks.
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 2:15:19 AM

@Hard Line - care to share your settings (BCLK...Voltages, etc). My UD3R's are for workstations. Currently @ 3.52 Ghz.
a c 177 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 2:19:07 AM

GB boards are the best! Their s'ware - I wouldn't poke with a stick! (...sorry, GB...)

While back I was jabbering here with someone about splash screens; early on in my use of GB's, I had found some hilarious splash screens, and thought I had to have one! After tuning & using the system, found out - well - not so much... Wanna 'see' the post; splash is so brief, can hardly see it anyway; and - with it off, I can 'hit' the BIOS entry every time, with the splash on, I seem to miss it one out of four. (...might be purely psychosomatic - I'm still gettin' high on those "placebos" the doc prescribed for me [:bilbat:2] ) Anyhow, one of the regulars here said if I wanted a scare, I should look at the latest 'FaceWizard' - it has an @BIOS button (known 'board-killer'...) Month later, thought to actually take a look at it - started up, showed itself disabling some GB utilties I've never installed, and installing some 'system hooks'; whole thing scared me - especially the mention of @BIOS, so - killed it. Very next thing I launched gave me my first BSOD in, say, ten months!!

Yay, GB utilities!! :kaola: 
July 25, 2010 2:19:36 AM

This chip is fast for me (i7-930) and I don't do anything that needs the extra clock. I also only have the stock fan, so at the moment no... but its good to know there is room to crank her up.


(lol, who am I kidding, I probably will be too curious not to try.... I just need to get a workable setup first so that I can know what this baby is capable of on stock)






July 25, 2010 2:21:50 AM

sure.... 21x 205 1.296v everything else on auto. and I manually set up my ram ( mushkin redline enhanced 6-8-6-24 1T @ 1640 1.66v I iwll double check next time I restart, ( I don't do that often lol ) load temps are 75C under Prime/LinX with a Noctua D-14
July 25, 2010 2:29:12 AM

jaquith said:
Glad to hear your smok'n!

Please explain exactly what you did?? Are you still in RAID 1? Are you still running the XHD/RAID in the BIOs? Did you bench something like ATTO?

Interested to know - thanks.


No, no RAID. Nice thing about RAID 1 is that you can degrade them (split them) and use them as regular SATA drives.


So I just booted into a win7 partition that was running on standalone drive, and added in the degraded drive. The transfers are perfect now. Getting up to 200MB/Sec on DISK IO (that is combined read and write from a Samsung 1TB to a Segate 1TB).

Will run some tests with HD Tune and report them back to you guys.
July 25, 2010 3:08:14 AM



(These are stock scores no RAID, just so I can compare)

This is what I am working with, I am hooking up 2 exact models of the Segate on the left. I tested the Samsung because I just bought it last week (so it should represent the latest). The segates are a year old.

Samsungs have nice burst rate, and the CPU and temps are low for those that want to OC, but the segate curve looks nicer.

Should I be worried about the warnings?

(will post RAID scores soon)
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 3:18:13 AM

no1ninja said:
No, no RAID. Nice thing about RAID 1 is that you can degrade them (split them) and use them as regular SATA drives.


Therefore, you still have NOT been able to FIX the RAID issue. RAID is a problem on the UD3R for many folks. Reading your post seem to only suggest that you unpaired the HDDs.

Thanks!

P.S. It is fun to OC and mess around in the BIOS. I have no complaints with GA MOBOs with one exception. Most modern MOBOs will prevent you from damaging your CPU & RAM.
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 3:19:17 AM

Hard Line said:
sure.... 21x 205 1.296v everything else on auto. and I manually set up my ram ( mushkin redline enhanced 6-8-6-24 1T @ 1640 1.66v I iwll double check next time I restart, ( I don't do that often lol ) load temps are 75C under Prime/LinX with a Noctua D-14


I'll try them soon - many thanks! I assume HT is off...?
July 25, 2010 5:07:56 AM

TEST 1:
Marvell RAID O – 2 x ST3100340AS (1TB) (64K stripe - connected @ GSATA 6/7)
GA-X58A-UDR3 Rev 2.0, Bios “FA”, i7-930, 3x2GB@ 1333
Windows 7 x64 Ultimate (all updates - and drivers installed)

Notes: Did not need to load driver, had it on usb stick, maybe windows found it itself. The setup was easy, only trick is that if you enable the GSATA controller, you have to reboot before jumping into GSATA config screen. It will not initialize Marvell firmware if the SATA ports were not scaned with GSATA option "enabled".

Boot up: 30 seconds from “starting windows” to logon screen.



CONCLUSION [stock single drive(Mb/s) / RAID 0 (Mb/s)]):

Min Speed: -36.4% [49.2/31.3] (this result doesn’t mean much, as the min speed is rare)
Max Speed: +43.6% [109.5/157.2]
Average Speed: +33.1% [85.8/114.2]

Access Time: -0.2 ms [13.4/13.2]
Burst Speed: – 9.9% [85.9/77.4]
CPU Usage: -7.7% [8.5/0.8] (this is actual system CPU saved)
July 25, 2010 6:41:12 AM

TEST 2:
Marvell RAID 1 – 2 x ST3100340AS (1TB) (64K stripe - connected @ GSATA 6/7)
GA-X58A-UDR3 Rev 2.0, Bios “FA”, i7-930, 3x2GB@ 1333
Windows 7 x64 Ultimate (all updates - and drivers installed)

Notes: Again easy install, windows found the partition, although driver was on stick just in case.

Boot up: 24 seconds from “starting windows” to logon screen. (weird as the scores in hd tune suck, this may mean this implementation still can be made more efficent) (tested the bootup at least 3 times to make sure)



CONCLUSION [stock single drive(Mb/s) / RAID 1 (Mb/s)]):

Min Speed: -80.3% [49.2/9.7] (this result doesn’t mean much, as the min speed is rare)
Max Speed: -38.8% [109.5/67.1]
Average Speed: -40.3% [85.8/51.3]

Access Time: +0.5 ms [13.4/12.9]
Burst Speed: – 4.7% [85.9/81.9]
CPU Usage: -8.0% [8.5/0.5] (this is actual system CPU saved)
July 25, 2010 7:55:22 AM

TEST 3:
Intel RAID 0 – 2 x ST3100340AS (1TB) (64K stripe - connected @ SATA 0/1)
GA-X58A-UDR3 Rev 2.0, Bios “FA”, i7-930, 3x2GB@ 1333
Windows 7 x64 Ultimate (all updates - and drivers installed)

Notes: Easy install. Changed default stripe from 128 to 64, just to compare to other tests.

Boot up: 32 seconds from “starting windows” to logon screen.



CONCLUSION [stock single drive(Mb/s) / RAID 0 (Mb/s)]):

Min Speed: -54.7% [49.2/22.3] (this result doesn’t mean much, as the min speed is rare)
Max Speed: +66.0% [109.5/181.8]
Average Speed: +47.0% [85.8/126.1]

Access Time: +0.0ms [13.4/13.4]
Burst Speed: – 0.1% [85.9/85.8]
CPU Usage: -6.5% [8.5/2.0] (this is actual system CPU saved)
July 25, 2010 9:12:31 AM

TEST 4:
Intel RAID 1 – 2 x ST3100340AS (1TB) (??? stripe - connected @ SATA 0/1)
GA-X58A-UDR3 Rev 2.0, Bios “FA”, i7-930, 3x2GB@ 1333
Windows 7 x64 Ultimate (all updates - and drivers installed)

Notes: Easy install. No option to change stripe, just using default RAID 1.

Boot up: 33 seconds from “starting windows” to logon screen.



CONCLUSION [stock single drive(Mb/s) / RAID 0 (Mb/s)]):

Min Speed: -57.5% [49.2/20.9] (this result doesn’t mean much, as the min speed is rare)
Max Speed: -0.3% [109.5/109.2]
Average Speed: -24.5% [85.8/64.8]

Access Time: -0.9ms [13.4/14.3]
Burst Speed: – 31.5% [85.9/58.8]
CPU Usage: -7.8% [8.5/0.7] (this is actual system CPU saved)
July 25, 2010 9:23:06 AM

Okay, I am going to bed, will try JMicron tomorrow. All the tests are on the same drives. I do at least 3 just to make sure they are consistent, wait for no HD activity. All installs are fresh, and all OS updates are performed and ALL drivers loaded.

HD's in the test are: 2 x Segate Barracuda 7200.11 (Date Code: 09121).
July 25, 2010 12:30:32 PM

jaquith said:
I'll try them soon - many thanks! I assume HT is off...?



Actually, that is with HT ON lol and eist on.. uses 40 watts on my desktop and 130 watts under load.. ( i think it uses more at load though)


Anybody tell me how to post a pic like you guys? i wanna show my raid performance on the ops board and never figured out how to post a pic THX
a c 177 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 1:21:01 PM

I have posted a fairly detailed article on capturing and posting images here...
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 1:22:09 PM

Interesting, specs with your SATA 2 HDD {ST3100340AS} running on everything EXEPT *Intel which its designed to run on.

*SATA2_0 ~ SATA2_5 = Intel
GSATA3_6 ~ GSATA3_7 = Marvell {TEST 1, TEST 2}
GSATA2_8 ~ GSATA2_9 = Gigabyte

{TEST 3, TEST4} ~ I don't know what you mean by "GSATA 1/2" w/o "guessing."

Bottom-line, you are running "bizarre" though "interesting" tests; meaning running "SATA2 HDDs" on SATA3 controllers in "compatibility mode."
July 25, 2010 1:31:16 PM



This is 2 samsung 500GB F3 on intel ICH on the UD3R

Notice the huge burst rate? I find that odd... Widows boots from after bios and entering password about 15-30 seconds. however I use ultimate defrag to put all exe and dlls at the beginning of drive along with windows folder

Thanks to bilbat for the tut
a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 1:37:34 PM

Hard Line said:
how to post a pic THX


little too late...

http://photobucket.com/ ; setup a free account ; upload pic ; click on thumb nail ; copy image url
Under Forum editor, click "insert image" button 6th from left ; paste url
July 25, 2010 5:07:24 PM

jaquith said:
Interesting, specs with your SATA 2 HDD {ST3100340AS} running on everything EXEPT *Intel which its designed to run on.

*SATA2_0 ~ SATA2_5 = Intel
GSATA3_6 ~ GSATA3_7 = Marvell {TEST 1, TEST 2}
GSATA2_8 ~ GSATA2_9 = Gigabyte

{TEST 3, TEST4} ~ I don't know what you mean by "GSATA 1/2" w/o "guessing."

Bottom-line, you are running "bizarre" though "interesting" tests; meaning running "SATA2 HDDs" on SATA3 controllers in "compatibility mode."



I figured as much, the segates are an older drive, so I didn`t think it would take advantage of SATA 3.0. Just wanted to see how the drives stacked up. So far its intel by land slide.


As for the GSATA 1/2, that is my brain impairment after doing 9 hours of PC work, those should be SATA 0/1.



I am starting to think that HD-Tune is not a good enough test. Take a look at TEST 2, the boot up time was a biggie, even though HD-Tune showed some of the worst results. This means that in certain applications that data moves fast. Not sure if boot up requires reading from the same sectors multiple times, but that is the only way I can explain the boost.

I probably should of done some file coppies, and Application load up tests to have a more practical idea of how the drives function.

July 25, 2010 5:51:12 PM


Hard Line said:
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/6352/hdtunepross2.jpg

This is 2 samsung 500GB F3 on intel ICH on the UD3R

Notice the huge burst rate? I find that odd... Widows boots from after bios and entering password about 15-30 seconds. however I use ultimate defrag to put all exe and dlls at the beginning of drive along with windows folder

Thanks to bilbat for the tut



Those are impressive results, but I find it odd that you got a negative CPU score, did the intel controller somehow do extra crunching for the chip that did not ivolve disk activity, lol.


I am starting to question HD Tunes ability to report on anything more than average rates. I think a more practical benchmark is needed to determine how good these RAID arrays hold up in practical environments.

Transfer rates are great, but what about multitasking? How good are these arrays when multiple requests are made. I would think that RAID 1 would look a little better. Just using HD-Tune for these tests, makes RAID 1 look like a joke. Yet the boot up time on test 2 was real.


Its hard to believe HD-Tune, that none of the RAID 1 implementations "read" faster than a single drive. This has to be wrong.




July 25, 2010 6:38:01 PM

Dude read my posts. I do a complete re-install for every test. Re-build the array. Do all the windows updates, and load all the drivers.


I honestly don't know how you can just change raid 0 to raid 1 in the bios, it involves a lot more than that. You should know this, the tests in HD TUNE clearly show the capacity and RAID device used. I have no magic wand.


Your posts are starting to be very confrontational, and you keep talking down to me as if I am an idiot, and using magic tricks that you and I both know are imposssible.


Sorry if you think that my tests are pointless. To me they are not, I want to see what the raid modes on this board can do with my drives. Maybe someone can be saved the headaches in a similar configuration.


RAID 1 can offer a READING advantage, this is not a difficult concept. The data is storeed on two drives and can easily be retrived in tandem. RAID 1 should have a reading advantage over a single drive.

(BTW, I am 37 and have been employed in the industry since 17. I have bougth houses, cottages and cars with my PC skills. So spare me your judgmental tone about my capacity.)



a c 715 V Motherboard
July 25, 2010 7:11:28 PM

@no1ninja - Intention good + confusion high ; you've given good info showing SATA 2 drives perform poorly in SATA 3 environment. Good Luck!
July 27, 2010 1:47:15 PM

no1ninja said:
Those are impressive results, but I find it odd that you got a negative CPU score, did the intel controller somehow do extra crunching for the chip that did not ivolve disk activity, lol.


I am starting to question HD Tunes ability to report on anything more than average rates. I think a more practical benchmark is needed to determine how good these RAID arrays hold up in practical environments.

Transfer rates are great, but what about multitasking? How good are these arrays when multiple requests are made. I would think that RAID 1 would look a little better. Just using HD-Tune for these tests, makes RAID 1 look like a joke. Yet the boot up time on test 2 was real.


Its hard to believe HD-Tune, that none of the RAID 1 implementations "read" faster than a single drive. This has to be wrong.



If you care to link us to an app that you feel would be accurate to test our theories, please by all means do so as I am curious about the results.. I still can't get over a burst speed of over 3k!! lol

Also as for the cpu usage, ever since my core 2 e7200, I have had a negative number there. maybe the resources of current gen cpus are so high, that there is practically no overhead
a c 177 V Motherboard
July 27, 2010 2:27:41 PM

Has anyone tried ATTO? I keep seeing its results at tech sites, and never remind myself to d/l & try it...
July 27, 2010 2:40:27 PM

bilbat said:
Has anyone tried ATTO? I keep seeing its results at tech sites, and never remind myself to d/l & try it...



Here is my results with Atto ( I just happened to have it.. ) I also included crystal disk bench as well



a c 177 V Motherboard
July 28, 2010 5:18:15 PM

Well, at least this series of posts reminded to D/L the thing [:lectrocrew:7]

Kind of interesting how you can just 'see' your stripe size in the RAID0 results. Wish I had had it when I sat down to do comprehensive tests of AHCI - I really didn't see any significant difference, and, comically enough, got told by various people that you needed to use either: A - a lot of little file bits, or B - only large contiguous files [:bilbat:9] Guess it depends upon what 'belief system' you subscribe to... Spose I could run some more tests, now athat I've finally got it - my ICH primaries are all RAIDs, but my jMicron is 'sometimes AHCI' (when I want 'hot-plug'), and sometimes not (when I want a quicker boot...); systems don't seem to 'care', one way or the other...
August 1, 2010 7:28:46 PM

Got some WD 1TB 3.0 SATA "black edition" drives. I realize the firmware on these babies means that they do not always play nice with raid, so far had no problems and they are fast. They were 89 CAD instead of the 65CAD for the 1TB at the same capacity but SATA 2.0.



Considering the 2.0TB cost me 178CAD, that is quite impressive for 2 mechanical 7200 rpm drives.
a c 177 V Motherboard
August 1, 2010 11:23:49 PM

I've spent a lot of time in Canada - used to have a client (and a girlfriend :love:  ) in Stratford, where the Shakspeare festival is in summer - had to look up the exchange rate - seems to me used to be around .70US, now it's damn near a dollar! Impressive - don't know if it speaks well for your economy, or poorly for ours! Not surprised though - the US dollar from 1918 when they started the Federal Reserve (a most convenient means of printing money) is now worth slightly less than four and one-half cents :heink: 
August 2, 2010 2:32:20 AM

The money is worth more now for sure, but a lot of our industry counts on a low dollar to be competitive with you guys. So even though the economy is doing better than the US, most of us still remain weary.

I know stratford very well, as well as the festival. There is some cute girls there for sure.
!