I think the answer is obvious...Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
Printable View
I think the answer is obvious...Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
Well for the price of this card you can get 2 x Intel x25-m g2 + Acard 1231ml + 2Gb DDR2 for cache.
I ordered one of these thru Amazon but canceled the order after I saw results, but I guess this will change once Fusion hear some feedback and decide to release some improved firmware.
Well I don't know what is holding back actual real world speeds. Bandwidth and random IOPs are both pretty damn high. It may be that we are at the point that we need a dedicated processor to handle all storage devices. I don't think the chipset that the ioXtreme does all that much. If you take a look at my CPU usage in my Iometer runs you'll see it is at like 40%.Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
Hopefully I'll see more of an increase in performance once I am back on phase and up to 4.6-4.8GHz.
Now to answer your question. With the current results, no way would I have bought it. I would have stuck w/ my X25-M.
Thanks a lot for getting it before anyone else and testing it. I personally appreciate it very much.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
that is strange that it takes such a large percentage of the cpu cycles, forty percent is outrageous. using the host bus adapter i have been playing with the highest i have seen is 9 percent, and that is using it as a dynamic disk with eight devices in software raid, so you think that the overhead would be even higher than that of the i/o extreme. strange. i hope that further firmwares etc will fix that. or maybe it was rushed to market? also maybe you have a borked unit? i would at least give a shot out to their tech support to touch base and see if that is in line with the expected performance of the unit. it does suck to test a new device, especially when it is expensive, and have it crap out on ya. i got totally bonered with the highpoint 4320 by god thats the biggest peice of :banana::banana::banana::banana: i have ever seen. i would say thanks for testing it, but i have a feeling you aren't done yet, something isnt adding up here, the upside down read and write issues along with the high cpu usage gives me this feeling that something odd is going on here! your efforts are appreciated though! i look forward to comparing its performance with other devices, etc. good luck getting the bugs ironed out.:up:
Kind of a shot in the dark, but do you have another Mobo you can test it on?
I have a :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty Asrock X58 Extreme, but it will have to be on stock clocks as the board won't startup anytime you need to change something in the bios. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Griff805
Then do it ;) Or try another PCI-e slot.
I am not surprised that is uses higher CPU% than say X25s on a dedicated RAID card, since as noted several times in the thread it does need the CPU for MFT like operations. I didn't think it would need 2 Nehalem cores however :D Where does that leave the actual processing of data?:)
I just hope that the really high CPU usage will not prove to be a "feature" of these PCI-e SSD cards.
That would seriously suck.
Hopefully the answer will reveal itself to be some kind of incompatibility / weirdness....
I don't recall IoDrive tests, but that would tell - if it's not high on IoDrive then it has dedicated RAM and IOP to do what IoXtreme seems to do on CPU itself.
@ Low
Look 4k random r/w :eek:
http://www.micronblogs.com/
Thats a real ssd :D
haha
I want that IO-monster :D
Pretty sad that thing can beat the ioXtreme for random read IOPS. However writes are still considerably slower.Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
Nice link. Looks like the C300 could well be the next ssd I buy.Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
Not so sure about the Marvel host adaptor though. I wonder why they used that for pc mark benchmarks. :shrug:
.132 on access times for that ssd? you would think it would be much better than that.
Well, you'd think that eventually in even a lower end company they might somehow come out with at least 1 item that is above average. Never know- Maybe one of the engineer's spent a little overtime working on it?Quote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
I'm guessing that is the marvel controller more than the SSD :shrug: Either way the drive looks promising considering it is at pre-release stage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
Anyone know how much this drive will retail for?
"AS SSD Benchmark" isnīt a exactly benchmark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
I prefer IOmeter. Look the video from 07/Dec.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...-ssd,2488.html
Another review. Takes a huge performance hit in a used state. Thankfully it is really easy to do a low-level format on this thing.
after reading that toms review it is pretty clear they are underwhwelmed by it as well.
A well-known problem ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
Look at the date of this review... http://forum.ssdworld.ch/viewtopic.p...54308f9fdf77a4
But you can try to clean the card without low-level-format.
FreeSpaceCleaner cleans a drive with "0" or "1" (FF) http://alex-is.de/PHP/fusion/downloa...download_id=10
That's a huge hit... i professional use you fill it up with writes in a day... what then, program a reformat on each reboot? stupid.
do you still have the device? i would be curious to run some benchmarks on it to measure the in game performance. that would probably be superb with this device.
I am using a 9800GX2 which really isn't the videocard I should be using for a test like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd