how fast does it boot windows?

can toms give this away like the SBM! I have no idea why I would need this tho.

how fast does it open solitaire ?

Porn delivered in .1 seconds or your (insert something witty) back...

can we have some benchmarks that aren't just I/O performance? How about boot times and/or program load times?

You should always include a retail price tag for these articles. If it's in there someplace i missed it.

Any non windows based benchmarks incase there is any sort of limit of throughput etc?

Windows does some funky things to hdd transfers - buffering things through ram and all sorts to find extra performance - wouldnt supprise me if that 2gb/s limit had something to do with software accessing the ram through the layers and windows subsystem etc

I am pretty sure the new Intel SSDs still don't have a good write speed compared to the Indolex controlled SSDs.

Too bad my money tree couldn't buy me even one X25-E.

And yeah where are the application load times?

When/if I ever have enough people paying me for space on my server, I know what to do.

We've come a long way from "Loading..." screens in Half Life 2 every five minutes or less.

Gonna say it as well: Please benchmark application loadtimes; photoshop with different filesizes and ofcourse level loadtimes in Crysis

I wish they also have real-world results/benches. Im not that familiar with synthetic benchmarks.

You will not be able to get faster speeds than that using 2 8x PCI-E. Even though the theoretical bandwidth is 2GB/s I have only even been able to get around 1.15GB/s, whwich is pretty close to what you are seeing. I would be interested to see what happens if you use 3 Raid controllers , although i cant remeber how many total physical lanes are available on the X58 chipset

Dear Tom,

another great article! Logically the cpu power should be the bottleneck, therefore you should try loading up same the config on a dedicated dual or multi cpu servermotherboard with a windows 2008 Server R2 RC 64-bit as OS for more simultaneous cpu operations. That might bump up your figures beyond 2.3GB. And then finally, this is a bit "breaking the frontiers" but hey isn't this what you guys are known for by now...you should grab that new workstation board from Asus (forget the exact name) that's filled only with PCIE slots (about 5 or more I think) and try adding 2 more adaptec cards with each 4 SSD's. This would eliminate the possible bottleneck of limited cpu operations per raid controller.

"Bottlenecks can most likely be found in CPU performance as well as farther down the platform in the storage controllers."
That's over-simplified, if not pure B$. Any modern CPU has more than enough BW. There are a lot of other limiting factors, as local buses, memory, and last, but not least, the OS (crappy vi$hta DRM-O$).
As both arrays (the more heterogeneous one from Samsung and that one) are hitting a very similar peak transfer rate (5% doesn't really count), despite very different HW setups, the most probable explanation lies in the OS as limiting factor (the single common denominator).
As for the retarded comments, inquiring windblow$ booting, or some application, or crappy game level loading times:
A large RAID is nothing for desktops, with inherent weak task and IO parallelization, but for servers with high IOPs and a lot of clients.

I wonder what performance Linux's ext4 file system would get out of that array... Since, after all, Windows (any version) is sorely lagging behind *NIX systems on I/O throughput.

from what ive seen those are perfectly valid questions because we ARE reading because were curious. By the way most comments on toms arent retarded (flaming,fanboys = retard post.)Anyways I think most of us were thinking the same thing since most of us won't ever buy something like that. windows boot time = around 2 min for my pc
ultimate array = ?