my seagate 7200.9 300gb 16mb buffer and seagate 7200.10 320gb 16mb buffer in raid 0 32k stripe.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/142...lisatarib1.png
Printable View
my seagate 7200.9 300gb 16mb buffer and seagate 7200.10 320gb 16mb buffer in raid 0 32k stripe.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/142...lisatarib1.png
Maxtor Maxline 3 250Gb http://alcoholic.dk/view.php?id=926&thumb=true
First run with my new SCSI setup, it's paltry compared to some...
Single Seagate Cheetah 10k 36.4 GB on an Adaptec 2940UW, system is an Athlon 64 3500+ AM2 @2.6, Biostar TForce 6100-AM2, 1 GB generic RAM.
Am I limited by PCI bus? I don't have anything but this card...
When I reassemble my server with its new stuff next week, I'll bench my onboard U320 controllers (both of them) and maybe even 3DMark my Wildcat Realizm.
My 74gb raptor adfd and 250gb hitatchi drive. The hitatchi one was the former main disk thats why its 2 partitions but gonna fix that later...
They are both in scythe quiet drive cases
Hmm will i loose or gain performance by moving svap file to the hitachi one?
There you go... RAID 0 - 1x maxtor 200gb + 1x seagate 7200.9 300gb, total 400gb (losing the 100gb from the seagate).
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1167896211
Here are 2 74gig raptors I just got at the BB deal for $119 in raid 0.
they are running on a Gigabyte Ga-965p-ds3 with the gigabyte raid controller
My 2 80gig WD sata2 drives in raid 0
2x WD740GD WD Raptor 74GB Hard Drive Raid 0
http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...ur_hd-tune.jpg
Single Raptor 150GB.
2 X 74GB Raptors with 8MB cache in RAID 0.
2 X 150GB Raptors in RAID 0.
My two 74gb raptors in EZ-Raid on P5W DH deluxe
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n...ntitledxxx.jpg
WD Raptor 36 GB 16 MB 10000RPM (on a SATA1 Via 890 MBoard)
http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...ADFD-00NLR.png
WD Caviar SE16 320GB SATA2 16MB 7200RPM
http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n...0KS-00MJB0.png
an evga nf680i, 6700 es ,
iram
http://img489.imageshack.us/img489/5169/iram6gt.th.jpg
raptor 74gb
http://img387.imageshack.us/img387/6725/r742sl.th.jpg
raptor 150gb
http://img387.imageshack.us/img387/948/r1508ce.th.jpg
Here's my RAMDisk in action under Vista. 8GB of system memory with 1.5gb allocated to RAMDisk for pagefile.....and another 3.5gb allocated to RAMDisk for game images.
I don't wait at all for games anymore.....:)
50% cpu usage!!! nasty
Looks worse than it is. It only takes a fraction of a second to load a BF2 map of roughly 160mb plus decompression time, so its still more efficient than a HD :)Quote:
Originally Posted by -Acid-
i,ll have to show you a fast one then it isnt fast enough :P
lol o.k i,m getting around 1000mbs read write so far
erm...... must try harder
;) Nice speedQuote:
Originally Posted by -Acid-
I'll try tweak mine some.
EDIT........
Tweaked my memory a little.....A-DATA DDR2-667 @ 889mhz (5,4,4,15,2t)
You Need to tweak much more :D
50% faster Access time .01 ms
nearly 2200mbs
i didnt think raptors were worth it until now. i want a pair lol... youll really see a performance gain when using vista with these drives aswell
Is it possible to run Areca Raid cards on the D.F.I Expert board or are they just supported on server boards with pci-e x8
Two Fujitsu MAX3036RCs 36GBs in a RAID 0 on the onboard SAS controller:
That board works just fine with an Areca in one of its x16 slots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
Hey thanks but are you sure of that?
Thanks....BE
Hitachi E7K500 500GB in Sata-1 mode.
http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/5...ds72505bo4.png
http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/9...0hdtachxy4.png
Yes, I've successfully run an Areca 1230 in an Asus A8N-SLI, A8N32-SLI Deluxe, and the DFI SLI-DR. Also currently run an Areca 1231ML in the A8N32-SLI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
Thanks bro I appreciate ithe validation and you're responses! I have been wondering what the option of doing that in a entheusiast board would be and have been looking at the Areca 1230 for a while now. Hows the Raid 6 on their or is it just a upgardeable option?:toast:
Also if I get the 1230 do I have to change the setting in bios for sli and are their any kind of boot issues with the card bios conflicting withh the boot process?
You'll want to set the board to "SLI mode" so it runs it as a pair of x8 slots. The 1230 card does RAID6 out of the box, although you may be interested in a 1231ML. It is a bit more expensive, but there is a definite jump in speed. Talk to Dave at Flickerdown (http://www.flickerdown.com/), I know he can get them.
I feel strange saying this but thatnks pissboy...lol Seriously though I appreciate you input and the linky you provided is dead:woot:
fixed
Thanks man! I still don't see the 1231ml that you mention
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/member.php?u=23359
Talk to dave, he can get you one.
We have not listed new controllers there yet because even without it we have sold a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
Please email me at egorbunov @ yahoo . com or dave @ flickerdown . com if you want us to help you out. We also provide tech support to our customers.
here's my results from HD tune with my 2x 74GB raptor raid0 and my new 1.1TB (4x400GB seagate 7200.10) raid5 array.
Well I have 4 seagate 7200.10 perp recording 250gig harddrives in raid 5 for a total of 700gig(formated they are only 233.3 a piece.
My result are:Min 49.5MB/s, Max 173.6MB/s, Average 93.5MB/s, Access time of 12.8ms, burst 143.6MB/s, Cpu Usage 11.7%. I don't know how to post the screen shot(I had to save to clipboard and then saved the image in paint; when I tried to save in hd-tune it would give error.) So if someone would let me pm it to them the can post it for me. Also my drives are sata3 with 16MB of cache each and I am using the raid controller that is built into the asus crosshair motherboard. I plain to add 2 more identical drive to the config when I get my tax returns(has 6 sata3 ports on board.) The number are lower in this program than the everest 2006 ultimate benchmark. Do my numbers seem were they should be. Seem like they are low to me but I never played with raiding before or hard drive benching.
theyr low coz of raid5, my raid0 with only two of theese has average of 130mbps, min 80 and max around 155
@spaceman if you need/want to run raid 5 try running raid 50 instead if posible ( raid 50 requires min of 6 drives ) . spanning 2 raid 5 arays in raid 0 .
High data transfer rates achieved do to its RAID 5 array segments
High I/O rates for small requests achieved do to its RAID 0 striping
should help boost performance ! other wise go with a raid 0 setup. i have 2 of the 7200.10 seagates 320gig 16mb drives in raid 0 and they are quite fast.
Here is my Raid 0 and Raid 5. 4x250gb Seagate 7200.9 drives on a P5B Intel Matrix Raid.
http://www.turborocco.com/hdbench/HDTuneRaid0.jpg
http://www.turborocco.com/hdbench/HDTuneRaid5.jpg
http://www.turborocco.com/hdbench/HDTachRaid0.jpg
Thanks for the information Subsider. I will be ordering to more identical drives by the end of the month. I will redo my array to your specs then. I know right now my drives config is slowing me down. At least it feels that way when I am moving data around. You know what type of performance increase I may get when I do it? The odd thing is my curve. It starts real good(usually my max happens right off the bat)then drops to nothing for a split second and then jumps to where it was and slowly climbs on average(spikes up some but deosn't spike down much at all) for the rest of the test. Kind of the opposite curve than most I see posted.
@ space man its hard to say but Average read , Access time and burst speeds should all benefit also write speeds and load time will be alot better than what you see/feel now! A good addon controller card would also help (much nicer than onboard controller ) and should reduce the cpu utilization
Seagate ES 320G (ST3320620NS) with Sata 3.0Gbp/s enabled
http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/8087/320ghc7.jpg
74G Raptor
http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/5059/raptoret5.jpg
My 320gb drive...
I have Adaptec 1430SA 4 port Sata2 raid controller and straight out of the box, into the system she went combined with 2 x Seagate 7200.10 750Gb Sata2 HDs in Raid 0.
Win XP Pro in first space and with 64Kb stripe on NTFS file system used throughout the whole storage space format.
4 partitions created: 1st with O/S and related applications on 15Gb,
2nd - 1 game installed on next 100Gb
3rd - 100Gb
4th - 1.1Tb of future space
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l2...id064kbstr.jpg
8Mb
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l2...d04partiti.jpg
32Mb
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l2...id04part-1.jpg
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=702545
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l2...DDR24-5SPD.jpg
Is this good for a single WD5000AAKS(500GB) in Vista Ultimate 64bit (AHCI) ?
I havn't done defragmentation yet.
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...DTuneBench.jpg
1st is Seagate 7200.10 500gb on Sata II
2nd is WD 250gb on IDE
there must be something wrong with your Seagate score...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachi_Roku
I had two 7200.10 320GB ones, sold them 2months ago, but they were much better than yours...
heres ss from it.
hmm i dunno MM, i'm using Vista and esata plug on evga 680i but esata disabled so it shouldn't be that. gonna give the new Vista RAID/SATA Driver v9.92 on Vista a try, using Vista default drivers atm
i just noticed, why your drive doesnt report temps?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachi_Roku
it looks like bad driver or...
i Have Vista, and for some strange reason, Vista thinks that my sata drives are Fibre Channel, so it doeasnt read SMART. But other that that it works 100%
Mad Man & Hachi Roku: Are you using x86 or x64 Vista?
Here is an update of the score, taken from the best of 3.
Similar to my previous one but a little better in write/read but burst rate is lower. I don't know which is more important for day to day multi-task and gaming..
This time I'm not using the newest Intel Matrix Storage driver - 7.50.1017. I use Vista x64 based 8.10.xxxx AHCI driver and the HD seems not able to get the 110 burst rate as before but a little faster read/write speed. Access time is around the same.
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...u/HDBench2.jpg
Vista Ultimate 32bit on nForce 590sli based moboQuote:
Originally Posted by XtremeTiramisu
4 x WD 74gb raptors in raid0
http://www.zaimc.com/temp/hdtune1.jpg
http://www.zaimc.com/temp/4x74gbraptorsraid0.jpg
seagate 750gb
http://www.zaimc.com/temp/hdtune2.jpg
WD 250GB NF6
http://users.skynet.be/fa664233/HD_Tach_WD2500JS.jpg
Quote:
Mad_Man
i just noticed, why your drive doesnt report temps?
it looks like bad driver or...
i Have Vista, and for some strange reason, Vista thinks that my sata drives are Fibre Channel, so it doeasnt read SMART. But other that that it works 100%
using Vista x64. not really sure why it doesn't read smart MM. updated to Nvidia v9.92 Sata/Raid Controller with no real change in performance.Quote:
XtremeTiramisu
Mad Man & Hachi Roku: Are you using x86 or x64 Vista?
hmm, I'm glad I've chosen the WD5000AAKS instead of the 500GB Seagate 7200.10. On a side note, my 320GB Seagate 7200.10 was defective just over a year so I just bought the WD5000AAKS and to my surprised, it's preety fast for a single HD in AHCI. Avg 60+ transfer speed and anywhere from 108~110 burst rate :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachi_Roku
Did you make sure that your drive doesn't have any bad sectors??
Are you one IDE or AHCI? maybe you should try AHCI on VISTA ;)
My 74GB Raptor
http://danny.yalittlehorsey.com/benc...s/hddbench.jpg
Pretty bold claim there, let's forget for a moment that I have raptors. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by -Acid-
The benchmarks I've seen indicate an advantage in single user performance with raid0 raptor 150GB drives, do note these are faster drives than the smaller raptors.
the reason is of course that maus are made with server performance in mind, not desktops and gamers.
Hitachi DeskStar T7K500 320GB SATA2
http://ceemic.pri.ee/hitachi/hitachispeed.jpg
Just did another quick HDTune Bench (1st bench)
From all the bench results I've tested using HDTune, the results were consistent. Updated to Intel Matrix Storage driver 7.50.1017.
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...WD5000AAKS.jpg
Here are my 2 x Raptors in RAID0 on Intel ICH9R
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/9183/hdtuneyc0.jpg
Wow that awesome lasse.j5 but why 74GB Raptor of `danny run so low??
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2197/...dd81bd1d_o.jpg
2x250GB Seagate (one 7200.8, one 7200.10) in RAID0
Single vs Raid0.Quote:
Originally Posted by alb@nian
what the heck is going on here?
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/4...3xr0yx8.th.jpg
http://img456.imageshack.us/img456/3...3xr0yq9.th.jpg
Your burstrate is high becouse i think you have write back data cache on, it caches some space in the memory before its placed on the harddisk.
My performance, didnt turn on write data back cache becouse you would get enormous burst amounts.
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/7513/hdtachfg7.png
allright, this is without write cache, looks so tiny :P
3x 500GB samsung SATA-II 100GB partition on ICH9R
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/469/ich9r0ey9.jpg
looks nice, especially the burst speed. I just run intel raid on ICH7R, dont know what the difference is tough.
This is mine with two Samsung HD501LJ in raid 0.The mobo is the Asus P5K Deluxe with a Celeron 440 at 3340Mhz.
just a lil info mak1skay, turn off write-back cache for this benchmark, the huge increase in bandwidth is because your ram is doing part of the work, just figured that out myself, not that its a bad thing, use it. It's gotta be good.
This is mine 320GB Barracuda.10
http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/8043/seagateil7.jpg
Not too bad...
http://img452.imageshack.us/img452/7084/hdtunebn2.jpg
Here's my scratch drive (i-ram) and data drive (4x320 Seagate Baracuda's set as raid 10.) Will repost when I test them on raid 0.
This is without Write-back cacheQuote:
Originally Posted by xTr33m sammich!
Very nice, Trike. Is that burst speed a bug? How are you getting?Quote:
Originally Posted by Trike
_______________________________
Deskstar 7K80 SATA2 8MB 0A30356
My drives are quite old. This system has been up since 11/05. Win XP Pro SP2. Clean system and benchies havn't changed at all I think.
Ran these tests yesterday.
Raid 0 - Nvidia nF4 Stripe 153 Gb; 4Kb cluster size
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2488/hdtach01mr9.jpg
http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/9486/atto03zi0.jpg http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/3788/hdtune01ds1.jpg
I've got a few questions. Are 500 Mb/s read speeds or bursts useless in SATA drives? Or is that only when you're transfering to another port/interface? I realize a SATA I drive can only receive 150 Mb/s.
The more drives you add in RAID 0, what happens to the average seek time? It's reduced right? And why are some peoples graphs straight all the way across? I know that's better than the slope. That means they can read larger files faster. . .? Why? Better access, latency times?
v3.0.4.0/ 4 x raptor
my c:\ drive,
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/3760/4xqf7.jpg
2x 36GB Raptors in RAID0 - very nice to those of you getting sub 10ms access times on 7200RPM drives.
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/1593/hdtunerm1.jpg
Shaun.
Write back cache set to write through.
http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z...ta3parti-1.jpg
2x Seagate 15k rpm U320 raid config on a lsi megaraid u320-2E controller pci-E
at a p5k-E board
direct i/o andr write trough
http://rol-co.nl/images/hdtach2.jpg
think this must be faster .....or not?
first time scsi so some difficulty's
4X 36GB 16MB Cache Raptors on a Dell PERC 5/i controller. Would have thought it'd have been faster than this.
160GB Seagate Barracuda:
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/7...t316081oi8.jpg
Look at my sig to see what these HDDs are running on. ICH9 chip set btw....
Pure Speed vs Size & Speed:
150 gig Raptor:
http://i21.tinypic.com/ok02kl.png
750 gig WD Cavair:
http://i20.tinypic.com/2utpyxc.png
I hope this gives someone a good comparison of both of WDs top drives.
2x 36GB 8MB catch WD Raptors RAID0 ICH9r chipset, drivers were built in my XP disc i made
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...sapete/HD2.jpg
I have 2 more on the way to run 4 in total in RAID0 via the ICH9r chipset
3x Barracudas 7200.10 320GB with one 300GB Raid0 slice stripe size 64kb and the rest, 400GB in Raid5 stripe size 128kb, P5B DLX ICH8r
4 WD Raptors 36GB 8MB catch, RAID0 32K strip, XP Pro SP2, Directly on the ICH9R
unless i've missed some settings or stripe size then nvidia raid sucks (as i already predicted). install was easy tho only took few mins from bios.
3x Seagate 7200.10 500gb
1x WD 500gb
9.92 driver
64kb stripe size
no e-sata used
Vista x64
somethings bad... i got 133MB/s with TWO 7200.10 on nVidia raid... under Vista too.
oh, wait, its raid-5, then its ok...
if i were you, i would use 2 of the seagates in raid 0 + the other seagate+WD in raid-1 for backups...
tried 0+1 and saw no real difference with nvidia software raid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad_Man
3x Seagate 7200.10 500gb
1x WD 500gb
9.92 driver
Vista x64
Evga 680i
Q6600 @3.6 450fsb
Ballistix 8500 @600 54410 (2:3)
all settings the same as above
without raid card i might as well go raid 5 for additional space as theirs no performance gain showing in this benchmark.
I'm just wondering what is the difference of using the Intel RAID configuration and a dedicated RAID card? I want to use RAID 0, but there's no data protection in the event the RAID array fails. How's RAID 1 speed when compared to a single drive setup?
finally got time to mess around with raid stripe size on 680i and 3x Seagate 7200.10 500gb and WD 500gb drives.
raid 0+1: 2x Seagate for raid 0, other hdd's for +1(mirror).
32kb: 32kb was the fastest on the 680i as seen in pic on left.
4/8kb: averaged around 25-35 mb/s respectively.
16kb: averaged 50-60mb/s
64kb: averaged 85~mb/s as seen in pics posted earlier
128kb: was pretty much the same as 64kb averaging around 85mb/s
raid 5: didn't test as much on raid 5 as there was the inherent raid 5 write penalty killing write speeds :( averaging copy from single hdd to raid 5 array was 25-28mb/s. read on the other hand was very good @50~mb/s (which was the fastest the single hdd could do copy)
64kb: did an average of 85mb/s as seen in above posts (still with pitiful write speeds)
32kb: close to the same as 64kb
16kb: is the golden as far as tested with an average of 97.6mb/s with a maximum of 118mb/s, pic on right
if i misinterprate any settings let me know
here are mine (as per drives connected to main rig in sig)
the 36GB Raptor & i-RAM have NTFS & default allocation size unit
Raptor36 is 22.57/34.4 GB full
i-RAM is 3.75/3.98 GB full
the RAID0 array (consisting of 2x RaptorX) is 8K stripe size
the RAID0 is 16/278 GB full
for anyone with a Gigabyte i-RAM connected to a ULi-M1575 SATA, i found that *WITH* drivers installed (vs2.20) that my HDTune results for i-RAM would increase the max MB/s by about 3MB/s, it would decrease min MB/s by about 10MB/s, & it would also INCREASE access time to approx. ~ 0.2-0.4ms (up from 0.0 :D ) - so obviously i opted NOT to install the ULi drivers :D:D:D
RAID 1 is the same speed as a single HDD, just gives you a total and instantly updating backup of the 1st disk. If you want speed and data protection go with RAID-5. With RAID 5 if a disk goes down you can insert a spare drive and rebuild the array with no data loss. Theres also RAID 0+1 or 10, take 2 sets of drives in RAID 1 (for data backup) and put the 2 sets in RAID 0 (for speed). Performance varys with southbridge. I got 155MB/sec with 4 raptors on the Intel ESB2 southbridge but nearly 200MB/sec on a Dell PERC 5/i controller card. Not being a storage guru I may well ahve missed a vital spetting o nthe ESB2 RAID though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt_Strider
Well ... another 74gig Raptor :)
http://img455.imageshack.us/img455/3...dcwd740mp6.png
my new Raptor 36G; 16MB; NCQ OFF
top 90 MBps
low 56 MBps
avg 78 MBps
Seagate SAS 147.1gb 15k Cheetah T10 In RAID 0 on a Dell Perc5i PCIe Controller card running Vista Ultimate on a DFI 590 SLI...