Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Onboard RAID is a JOKE!!

Last response: in Storage
Share
November 30, 2002 3:43:19 AM

i setup 2 Maxtor 7200rpm ATA133 40GB HDs as Raid 0 on my Abit-kx7-333R. The Hard Drive score is "23519kB/s" from SiSoftware Sandra Professional 2003, a bit slower than a single ATA100 7200rpm 30GB HD. So what the hell does raid 0 for??

Windows XP sp1.
Abit kx7-333r
AMD XP 2000+
256MB DDR333
HingPoint RAID Controller with BIOS version: v2.34 & Driver version: v2.34
VIA 4in1 440v(a) Driver

:) 

More about : onboard raid joke

November 30, 2002 3:48:53 AM

Many benchmark programs, Sandra especially, are crap awefull at PROPERLY benchmarking raided drives.

<b>The Intel Celleron 2.1 & 2.2Ghz processors provide consumers with a great way to get on the Internet. Which one of the 478 pins plug into the phone socket? - <i>Intel & The Inquirer</i></b>
November 30, 2002 3:58:08 AM

well, it sounds right. i can tell the raid 0 is 3x faster than a single 40gb when booting up windows xp.

:) 
Related resources
November 30, 2002 4:51:23 AM

I have the same mobo as yours with 2 of IBM 60GXP 40GB set up as RAID 0. It scored appx. 32000 in Sandra.
Did you have any software that runs background when you benchmarked it?
:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
November 30, 2002 5:08:32 AM

i have no other softwares running while i test it. but i splited the raid 0 into 2 partitions, is that where the poor performance came from?

:) 
November 30, 2002 8:23:17 AM

entirey possible, sandra doesn't like split partitions or any fragmentation.
my 5Gb OS partition never gets a good score, regardless of how full it is or not. Thus, i ignore sandra :) 

<b>The Intel Celleron 2.1 & 2.2Ghz processors provide consumers with a great way to get on the Internet. Which one of the 478 pins plug into the phone socket? - <i>Intel & The Inquirer</i></b>
November 30, 2002 9:39:05 AM

Did you read the RAID FAQ? Then you know that stripe and clustersize has an impact on performance.
The Maxtor drives, you are referring to. Are they the D740X?
According to <A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com.au/techstuff/a_hdd_shootout..." target="_new">this</A> that maxtor drive isn't exactly top-performer when it comes to RAID0.


<i><b>Engineering is the fine art of making what you want from things you can get</b></i>
<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=655" target="_new">My systems</A>
November 30, 2002 1:18:16 PM

Maybe you have the USB 2.0 device enabled which cut the bandwidth for the PCI bus where your raid card is attached.
Here are some benchmark I made using Sandra 2002 sp1 (not 2003)by using a RAID 0 configuration with a Promise Fasttrack100 TX2 controller:
two maxtor 60 GB D740X with USB 20 enabled-26000
two maxtor 60 GB D740X with USB 20 disabled-34000
two IBM 120GXP 120GB with USB 20 enabled-41000
two IBM 120GXP 120GB with USB 20 disabled-55000
Mobo ASUS A7V-333
CPU Athlon XP 1800+@1671MHz
FSB 145 MHz
RAM PC2700 CAS2 1024 MB
RAID controller Promise Fasttrack 100TX2

I had almost the same results with the onboard raid controller even if it doesn't allow to modify the block size.
Partitions do not affect the results so much, but it is evident that the drives are faster at the beginning of the platters (outer zone) that means two IBM 120GXP 120GB allow a transfer rate in RAID 0 (measured with ZDwinBench Diskmark)higher then 75 MB/s (90 MB/s with Sandra)untill a total capacity of 60 GB (over 240 total). There you'll install the OS and programs without problems

there are some guy that works hours to speed up their computer to save one minute over a ten minutes job. <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by unoc on 11/30/02 10:56 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 30, 2002 3:16:51 PM

Quote:
but i splited the raid 0 into 2 partitions, is that where the poor performance came from?

I don't think so since mine is splitted into 3 partitions.

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
November 30, 2002 3:44:56 PM

I have four partitions. No problems. Maybe it is faster.
But I was never able using maxtor to have performaces as good as with IBM.

there are some guy that works hours to speed up their computer to save one minute over a ten minutes job.
November 30, 2002 9:02:03 PM

Very interesting about your results relating to USB 2.0.
Is this when the USB 2.0 devices are being used or just the simple fact that it is enabled that reduces the bandwidth?



<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/index.php" target="_new">A better place to be</A> :wink:
November 30, 2002 9:21:20 PM

When it is enabled. To use all the bandwidth of the PCI bus, on the A7V333 with the VIA KT333 chipset, you must have the USB 2.0 disabled by the jumper on the board. It is an old question between a lot of A7V333 owners, VIA tech and ASUS. At the moment no bios or 4in1 drivers are able to solve the problem. Because I do not have any USB2.0 device, I disabled the device and the RAID 0 array works at full speed. I do not know if other motherboard has the same problem nor I tried other PCI USB 2.0 adapter

there are some guy that works hours to speed up their computer to save one minute over a ten minutes job.
December 1, 2002 5:24:13 PM

Unoc is right, there is a bug in the VIA chipset that makes the onboard Raid controller work slow when the USB 2.0 ports are enabled. I have a stripped array of 2 Maxtor D740X and my Sandra2002 scores improved from about 25,000 to about 36,000 when I disabled the USB 2.0 ports. You can disable them easily through the Windows Control Panel or in some motherboards using a jumper.

__________________________________________________
It's not important to know all the answers, as long as you know how to contact someone who does.
December 1, 2002 6:03:59 PM

36000 is still slow. I score around 50000. Check the link I posted earlier. It mentions something about a PCI latency problem and a patch which should improve performance further.

<i><b>Engineering is the fine art of making what you want from things you can get</b></i>
<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=655" target="_new">My systems</A>
December 1, 2002 8:50:57 PM

Hmmm Interesting.
Is this JUST an asus/via problem, or do other manufacturuers like abit or epox have similar issues?

<b>Just because someone's a member of an ethnic minority doesn't mean they're not a nasty small-minded little jerk. <i>Terry Pratchett</i></b>
December 1, 2002 9:27:59 PM

I already used the rpp1.02 patch from VIA, that has been realized just to solve the PCI latency problem, I installed two Maxtor drives in RAID 0, but I was never able to reach that performances you had (50000).
Only with the 120GXP I can have even better performances (and using 64kB for block size) reaching 55000 with Sandra 2002 sp1.
I use a ASUS A7V333 (KT333) bios 1015. What's yours ?

there are some guy that works hours to speed up their computer to save one minute over a ten minutes job.
December 2, 2002 12:48:56 AM

Why are you still bothering with sandra?

<b>Just because someone's a member of an ethnic minority doesn't mean they're not a nasty small-minded little jerk. <i>Terry Pratchett</i></b>
a b G Storage
December 2, 2002 2:49:22 AM

Had the same question about three weeks ago. I was benchmarking with Sandra and HD Tach and getting poor results (so I thought), but the machine seemed quicker especially file transfers. Try WinBench 99. I think you'll probably find truer results with that.
-Brett
December 2, 2002 8:55:40 AM

Mary is OK ?

there are some guy that works hours to speed up their computer to save one minute over a ten minutes job.
!