| Test System | |
|---|---|
| Processor | AMD Athlon XP 2200+ |
| Motherboard | DFI LANParty KT400A
VIA KT400A Chipset BIOS : May 6, 2003 |
| RAM | 256 MB DDR333/PC2700, CL2 Corsair Micro |
| Controller & Hard Drives | VIA VT8235 UltraATA/133
HighPoint HPT372N On-Board BIOS 2.342 2x Western Digital WD2000BB |
| Display Adapter | nVIDIA GeForce3 Ti4200, 64 MB |
| Network Card | 3COM 905TX PCI 100 MBit |
| Operating System | Windows 2000 Professional
5.00.2195, Service Pack 3 |
| Benchmarks and Tests | |
| Performance Measurements | HD Tach 2.61, c’t h2benchw |
| I/O performance | Intel IOMeter |
| Drivers and Settings | |
| Graphics Driver | NVIDIA Reference Driver 41.09 |
| Drivers | Intel Application Accelerator 2.3 |
| DirectX Version | 9.0 |
| Resolution | 1024 x 768, 16 Bit, 85 Hz refresh |
Owing to time restraints, we limited the capacity of the RAID array to 25 GB. Tests on total capacities of up to 400 GB would have taken much longer and would not have produced a different result. All the low-level measurements (IOMeter, HDTach) are only run without partitions anyway and refer to the total capacity of the RAID array.
Previous
Next
Summary
- RAID 1.5 With Two Hard Drives: Added Value Or A Marketing Gag?
- HighPoint HPT372N
- RAID 15 And RAID 1.5 In Detail
- RAID 1.5 From HighPoint: Striping With Parity Data
- Test Setup
- Benchmark Results
- Data Transfer Performance
- Application Performance: Fileserver
- Conclusion: Pros And Cons For RAID 1.5 Balance Out
Ask a Category Expert
What about RAID 1.5 with Solid State disks. You have nothing to move, yet you can double your read speed with mirroring. Sounds perfect for server caches.