areca 1231/512mb/4x jmicron slc ssd raid0Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerlad
reformat? ntfs? xp installed on the array along with games/apps on NTFS not FAT/FAT32
@ xp setup full NTFS format takes 2-3 seconds
Printable View
areca 1231/512mb/4x jmicron slc ssd raid0Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerlad
reformat? ntfs? xp installed on the array along with games/apps on NTFS not FAT/FAT32
@ xp setup full NTFS format takes 2-3 seconds
my loadups that fast because its cached ? :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nizzen
with your tendency to claim 5x @ 6x/4x @ 5x.. and who knows what cache.. can you back up this claim ^ ??
with your 1680/2gb~4gb/6x vertex you should put my 1231/512mb/4x jmicron cod4/cod5 loadups to shame
you think my app *.bat loadup was cached also ?
i will bring another video of that ;)
everything you guys see in the videos is pure/raw power no tricks no bs
Not saying it is bs etc, but you could easily prove it's not by doing a video of the bootup from when you press the power switch, and then load COD4 & 5 then exit them and then run the .bat file.Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
If the times are just as fast, then you have one crazy fast setup and a 12xx might have to be under my christmas tree.
People need to much proof. This isn't even official benchmarking, just people telling their experiences and showing their setups for advice.
Why don't you guys pull some strings in the e-zine communities and make them start testing setups like these in real world stuff. I mean every site could do their ovn script and load up windows and a bunch of chosen apps and post a score and compare.
Than more people would learn the real truth and avoid all this bickering.
I'm more curious about what makes this Areca so special that makes it perform better in Raid0 in these real world tasks? It shouldn't be it processor, right?
And I feel sorry for myself cause it has 12ports, and I don't need them on my main rig.
Is there a card with less ports that would give same results?
Intense :slobber:Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
Wow Napalm, those loading time are amazing. Now I wish I had a couple thousand extra to spend on a nice controller and a bunch of super nice drives.
they're normal crappy jmicron drives, just backed by an uber raid card.
They are not crappy as they are SLC, not the MLC versions, and the only week point on the drives was lack of cache which the Areca solves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerlad
Your x25-m's would stutter if there wasn't any cache.
yeah, I thought it was the mlc drives. Sorry.
Not really. They only use 256kb for write buffering in the first place. The rest is for wear leveling operations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
Playing devil's advocate? Yes, really. Without ANY cache, I believe the drive would stutter.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
Without ANY cache the drive would not work AT ALL. It would not stutter without a write buffer. The performance would be less, but it would not stutter. I believe you can turn this write buffer off and try it yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoiler
I'd love to try. Just waiting on Intel to get that new firmware out there on the new drives!
Intel uses 16x more cache than J-micron!Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
Stop trying to mislead, 256k is huge compared to 16k!
The only thing I was saying the whole time is that it is not the cache that is making the X25 stutter-free. Cache is for performance improvements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
I wonder how stutter free it will be with 16kb of cache.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
How would the x25-m write combine etc?...... It could't!
dude I am telling you, you can turn off the cache that's on the drive and see for yourself. Works fine, just a lot slower. Doesn't stutter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
You second quote suggests that when you disable the cache in WINDOWS, the drive uses 0 cache in the drive. (Atleast for your quote/point to make sense that is what it would need to suggest)Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
The first thing that doesn't sound correct, is that you have previously stated that a drive with 0 cache will not work at all.
So which is it?
The drive either uses the minimum 256k cache but not the remaining 15.75mb used for wear leveling when you disable caching, or it uses NO cache at all and as you stated previously the drive will not function.
If the x25-m still uses the 256k cache then my point still stands because the x25-m is still opperating with 1600% more cache than the j-micron even with the wear levelling cache disabled.
So with performance already hit with the wear levelling cache disabled, how do you think the x25-m would fare if you replaced the 256k cache with 16k?
^^^
My hunch is your defending a careless comment that hadn't been thought through!
It's ok to be wrong on this forum occasionallly.
Hey Napalm, what RAM you're using in the ARS-1231?
Great results as always mate.
You can't turn off the cache that is used for wear leveling. It doesn't let you because the drive wouldn't work at all. When it erases a block, where do you think it would keep the previous contents until it has to write the modified data back?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
My second quote suggests what it says. When you click the turn off cache button in windows, there is no stuttering. We are clearly talking about the write buffer at that point as I've already said wear leveling cache can not be disabled.
It lets you turn off the write buffer because that is just for performance purposes. You can turn off the read/write buffer an an HDD too. Will be 5-10x slower. It is the same idea but SSDs don't suffer anywhere near as much. My point stands, the X25 would not stutter even with a 0kb write buffer. It would be slow, but it would not stutter. Stuttering is due to bad controller design and not due to cache. Cache can somewhat remedy the bad controller design, but if the controller is fine to begin with then there is nothing to remedy.
Is the cache not DRAM that is used as memory by the controller for deciding exactly where to write data? It's not used for user data because of the risk of data loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
The FAQ's on Kingstons web site (X25-M) states Data caching is limited to the controller for enhanced performance. Disabling Write Cache simply adds latency and provides no significant additional data loss protection.
Data loss Lol!Quote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
You really think it's an issue to use cache as a buffer before it get to disk?
This is nearly as bad as the write back cache argument.
Chances are if your writing a file and sudden power failure happens the data has
a) Already been written to disk
b) Has only written part of file so it's going to be corrupt anyway.
Simple question, if I disable cache on my x25-m in windows, how much cache is it using to remain operational?Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
I dont know. I would assume somewhere in the 15mb range. This cache has nothing in common with the cache that Areca provides. Completely different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
Your original statement of "Your x25-m's would stutter if there wasn't any cache" is completely and utterly false. If you were talking about all cache, then no it wouldn't stutter because it wouldn't even work due to the controller design. If you were talking about write buffer then no, it wouldn't stutter without it.
Just quoting anandtech on the G1 x25-m review, I'm not stating a personal opinion, but I did not make that clear. Are you getting confused between the vertex and x25-M on cache?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
Is this not the problem the J-Microns have with their 16kb cache?Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
I just don't believe an x25-m wouldn't stutter if it only had 16kb of cache resources to use.
I´m not Napalm, but i´m using almost the same controler (ARC-1261ML).Quote:
Originally Posted by Jor3lBR
I´ve running Kingston KVR533D2E4/2G (2GB ECC) on this controller
heres the last vid on this 1231/4x slc jmicron "fiasco/bickering/etc"
100-app loadup: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFnAV53-1nE
you can considerate it as a slow loadup
kernel paging disabled.. my guess 4-5 seconds less if enabled
i just dont have the time to try/confirm so ill leave it at that
100-app.bat:
Quote:
start "" "C:\Apps\ATTObench32.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\Core Temp.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\cpuz.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\CUDA-Z-0.4.74.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\cwshredder.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\DiskMark.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\fctest.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\Fritz Chess Benchmark.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\GPU-Z.0.3.4.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\HiJackThis.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\NiBiTor.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\oZone3D_SurfaceDeformer_Benchmark.exe "
start "" "C:\Apps\RBE_121.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\RootkitBuster.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\super_pi_mod.exe"
start "" "C:\Apps\TeamViewer_Setup.exe"
start "" "C:\Cinebench10\Cinebench10.exe"
start "" "C:\Fraps\fraps.exe"
start "" "C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Chrome\Application\chrome.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\7-Zip\7zFM.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Adobe\Reader 9.0\Reader\AcroRd32.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Areca Technology Corp\Http Proxy Server Service\ArcHttpSrvGUI.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Avira\AntiVir Desktop\avcenter.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Avira\AntiVir Desktop\avconfig.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Avira\AntiVir Desktop\setup.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\CCleaner\CCleaner.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\CyberLink\PowerDVD9\PowerDVD9.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\DivX\DivX Player\DivX Player.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\DVD Shrink\DVD Shrink 3.2.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Eraser\Eraser.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\EVGA Precision\EVGAPrecision.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\FastStone Photo Resizer\FSResizer.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\foobar2000\foobar2000.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\GIMP-2.0\bin\gimp-2.6.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\GIMP-2.0\bin\gimp-console-2.6.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\HT OMEGA CLARO\Advance\DLL\CmiCnfgP.cpl"
start "" "C:\Program Files\ImgBurn\ImgBurn.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\ImgBurn\ImgBurnPreview.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\IEXPLORE.EXE"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Iometer.org\Iometer 2006.07.27\Iometer.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Lightsmark 2008\bin\win32\Lightsmark2008.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\MadOnion.com\3DMark2001 SE\3DMark2001SE.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\SeaMonkey\seamonkey.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\nLite\nLite.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\OpenOffice.org 3\program\sdraw.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\OpenOffice.org 3\program\simpress.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\OpenOffice.org 3\program\smath.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Opera 10 Beta\opera.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\RivaTuner v2.24\RivaTuner.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Safari\Safari.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Skype\Phone\Skype.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\VideoLAN\VLC\vlc.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Winamp\winamp.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Windows Media Player\wmplayer.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Windows NT\Accessories\wordpad.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\WinRAR\WinRAR.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Wise Registry Cleaner\WiseRegistryCleaner.exe"
start "" "C:\Program Files\Yahoo!\Messenger\YahooMessenger.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\appwiz.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\bootvrfy.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\calc.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmd.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmdlib.wsc"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\compmgmt.msc"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\control.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\desk.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\devmgmt.msc"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\dfrg.msc"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\diskmgmt.msc"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\diskpart.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\dxdiag.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\fsmgmt.msc"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\hdwwiz.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\inetcpl.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\intl.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\label.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\main.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\mmc.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\mmsys.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\mplay32.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\msconfig.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\msiexec.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\mspaint.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\notepad.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\ntimage.gif"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\nvcplui.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\powercfg.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\regedt32.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\sc.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\services.msc"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\sigverif.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\sndvol32.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\sysdm.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\taskmgr.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\timedate.cpl"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\userinit.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\verifier.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\winver.exe"
start "" "C:\WINDOWS\system32\wmimgmt.msc"
you are saying its bsQuote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
took two days to do the 100-app.. i only got so much time.. installing all the apps/doing testing the app.bat/taking vid/uploading.. takes whole lot of time
ok i got the 100app going now.. i can add cod4 cod5 and loadem up like the peanuts they are.. and i can show you the system booting with the giga ep45 extreme/areca 1231 512mb and doing all the loadups after booting.. but you guys still wont be satisfied/wont believe it
you guys then will say that somehow i sped up the vid.. all the vids ive posted are raw and unedited.. not one frame deleted/added/modified/anything
give me a good reason to spend anymore of my time on this.. all i get is insults/"shenanigans"
unfortunately/sadly even here @ xs some dont have any knowledge/understanding of storage systems :shrug:
Would it be possible to integrate the boot up timer script Rhys posted with your .bat file? If possible it would give the time it takes to do a complete restart, boot and 100 app load with a single click and time it for you. :)
I would be most curious in that.
Also if you would post a video of that kind of script at work, from the begining to the end... I think people should be satisfied! :D
Napalm, I just want to be 100% sure, as you know the old saying "If it looks too good to be true it probably isn't".Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
I don't think you can blame us for wanting to rule out the possibility of any shenanigan's if the results buck the trend of our current logic of storage systems, because I don't want to go out and spend big $/£ on a card that someone 'could' have inflated it's performance.
You see we can't always trust what we see on the other end of a modem as no one is perfect, and I can't ignore the temptation/motive to inflate the size of one's e-peen.
All this time I have been hoping I was wrong....... I just need to believe I am.
I know it takes time, and I already appreciate what you have done so far, But I think what would help erase the seed of doubt is if you did the following:
With you new HD cam, Film the whole thing by hand, i.e. you pressing the power button, waiting for Bios to post, getting to desktop, running the bat file and COD4/5 and then possibly even the script I posted that times your restart time.
If you did it like this then I doubt anyone could accuse you of any shenanigans etc. and quite simply you will then definitely have the fasted system the vast majority of us have seen, if not all.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by XS Janus
Napalm,
I believe you right now, but I would love to see the entire thing including the power on/boot process. It's time to see how long that Areca takes to initialize!
Hi Napalm. I just watched your cod loading time. Insane! Out of interest have you tried any other ssd's with your raid card?
^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Jor3lBR
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilhooley
Quote:
Originally Posted by EniGmA1987
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jor3lBR
also @ alvinQuote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
thanks guys :toast:
im using the 512 here:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jor3lBR
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...ame=Unbuffered
single sided 512/dual sided 1gb and 2gb work but not the current single sided 1gb @ newegg
new firmware will probably remedy that
no these jcraps are the first and only ssdsQuote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
can you guys imagine 4x x25e ?
what are you guys gonna say when you see vids of that ?? :)
Humm nice so it uses DDR2 then :pQuote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
They will say is too good to be true bogus man! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
If you film it by hand and start from when you power on the machine, I don't think anyone could really 'call bogus'!Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
You see other raid cards hinder performance, Your benchmark performance isn't the fasted, but your video's show it is pretty much the fasted Nand (possibly Ram also) based SSD's.
What's the issue with filming it in such a way that we can be sure it's legit?
Heck even if you say "I told you so" in the Video! Lol:)
Edit the boot timer script with app load commands,guys, come on!
I don't need it for proof, just for the fact!
:D
^ lol
well for whatevers worth..
100 app COD4 COD5 @ 1920x1080 loadups
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYlOi1Hp9Fk
hope it answers Qs.. puts some doubts to rest.. but i doubt it :)
anyways this hd cam is total junk.. keeps refocusing/adjusting @ black and white screens like crazy.. ive tried manual/auto/lower rez i cant get it steady
Napalm I’m wondering if the raw throughput ability of the early generation drives in combination with the 1231 hard raid is actually a better set up than what might be obtained with new gen drives? I could lend you 2 x25-e’s when my G2 arrives if you could find another 2 to experiment with. Only two conditions. One, I get them back ;) Two, I can see a video of your pc from boot up to game launching. Deal?
Nice vid, Napalm! Thanks... :)
turning off all those apps, looks tiresome, I wouldn't have the nerves.
You need a shutdown script to run in parallel! :D
And maybe one of these new LSI cards under your Christmas tree: http://www.lsichannelgateway.com/new.../20090728.html "performance with up to 2.88 GB/s in sequential reads and 1.87 GB/s in sequential writes"
Great work Napalm!
You have a great system there. How about doing a short video of your system boot -cold boot please? No need for the 100 app loading in the video.
MegaRAID SAS 9260-8i:Quote:
Originally Posted by XS Janus
Would be nice to see if they outperform the 1231ML's cause they cost half the price!
Reviews please!
Must say a lot of you guys seems all winded up over high end raid controllers, but are they really that great when we are talking a normal raid 0 configuration compaired to onboard raid? In most benchmark tests I have seen they don't seem more than 5-10% faster. Of course in benchmark tests thats all great but is it something people would notice in daily computer use?
If Napalms results are legit, then yes it would be VERY noticeable as in load times cut in half over an x25.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mic
Benchmarks tell a different story however, and say the raid should 'actually' be worse. Hence why I was pushing for a video recording of the whole process including power on, boot up etc. so I could be confident that HIGH END Areca raid cards do in fact speed things up rather than slow them down.
the vertex stuttered even with the huge 64mb cache before different firmware came out according the the anandtech review.
you can send me 4x x25e if you want and still you guys wont believe how fast cod4 loadup is right after bootupQuote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
100 more vids wont be enough
i dont care if everyone @ xs instead believes that me/my systems/all the results i ever posted/all the vids now/everything napalm is all big pile of BS.. i could care less
funny thing is i am in the same boat with you guys just finding out just how suky (even acards) your systems are.. i knew my systems fast but damn..
heres the final vid.. reboot/reboot script
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9buLs4gIotU
not the fastest bootup/reboot but typical
if you guys cant openup your minds and let a bit of illumination in.. go ahead still believe all the useless benchmarks you want.. fine by me
It's not that we don't believe you. I do, but we just want more evidence. I think what they want is for you to reboot, load up cod4 and cod 5 and then the 100 app .bat, because they want to make sure it's not massive caching.
While you're at it throw a stop watch in the video so no one complains about the video being fast forwarded.
I have a basic two HDD RAID 0. It isn't incredible or anything but considering your setup cost 10 times as much as mine the speed increase is certainly believable.
I'm satisfied with your movie Napalm. Very nice XP boot! You have a pretty good system.
I'm very happy that I got to see your Areca card boot too. I always wondered how long that thing took to initialize. I couldn't tell from the video though: was it the Areca that was taking the most time? Or was it the motherboard posting? If it was the Areca, then it doesn't appear to be that much faster than the Adaptec (only in reference to initialization).
Oh, and one last question:
When are you moving to Vista or Win 7?
Wow, nice boot 50sec out of which 20sec go to Areca intializing.
What I would like to see "timed" on these SSDs is that app loading script and COD4,5 load times on ICH vs. Areca!
I know it is probably do tiresome to do, but if you ever do please post results. :)
I think that would be the final thing that would convince to buy Areca and not go just ICH!
The controller checks all ports. This costs the most time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoiler
Ok, every MB initialise drives faster, but a controller gives more safety
hang on reading through this i getting more confused.... so you have ram for a raid controller? and why are you using that card if the southbridge raid is faster?
that boot time was just crazy! and I thought my old Iram Raid 0 with xp was pretty fast to boot.
Southbridge ist faster? Never!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by noobieocer
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=207557Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
o oops i just looked at burst speed lol
If you're referring to FEAR's post above, note that the term used was "initialised faster" - not faster per se. We've pretty much proven in this thread that in real-world usage scenarios, not just benchmark numbers, the Areca card puts out much greater performance than ICH RAID arrays. However, as mentioned, hardware RAID controllers take a long, long time to boot up, because they scan all ports for devices, recognise existing arrays, etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by noobieocer
As for "RAM for a raid controller", sure. Any decent hardware RAID controller will feature on-card cache. The Areca cards just allow you to use a standard DIMM module instead of having the cache RAM soldered to the card, so you can upgrade the cache amount should you choose to.
That's the thing, it hasn't! We are relying on what someone is telling us instead of someone showing us!Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
How many times have I requested to film the whole thing rather than just a portion that leaves room for speculation of the process being run from caching (Camera should also be handheld also).
I appreciate the work Napalm's put in to 're-educate' some of us, but I can only take the results with a grain of salt because of this.
i.e. if someone said ICH10R was faster than Areca I wouldn't even dream of arguing any different because I still don't have any credible evidence to suggest otherwise.
My request is not anymore difficult than what has been demonstrated already, hence why at this stage the current results are less credible than when they were first published.
You filmed the bootup Napalm, it was great, I have no argument with it at all!
Why can't you do that and film the bat file and COD4/5? and possible demonstrate your camera holding abilities?
If you can do that then I bet 99% of us will change our tune entirely and won't be able to argue with the results.
Why don't you guys believe him? It definitely is odd that he won't post a vid showing a cold boot in front of the tests but the COD4 loading time makes some sense. My guess is that it is well optimized and the requests are mainly sequential reads. Most games are not like this, but some are (I think crysis is like this too). My 2x X25-E load that level in ~2.8 seconds.
20 seconds @ 70MB/s read (7200rpm storage HDD)
2.8 seconds @ 470MB/s read (2x X25-E, very degraded)
1.5 seconds @ 750MB/s read (Napalm's setup)
Makes sense as the numbers roughly match up and there is always these small random differences system to system, especially when getting into loading times that are in the few second range and measuring with a stop watch. Has nothing to do with areca. Any raid card that can do 750mb/s sequentially should be able to do this for COD4. A third X25-E would get me to about 1.9-2.0 seconds and that is where ICH would max out.
By the way, if any of you guys are testing this without at least a 4Ghz Intel and some quick ram then I don't think you'll like what you will see. Your CPU is holding you back and you probably won't load that fast regardless of your storage speed. I did a quick test @ 3Ghz and it took like 5 seconds (my guess, I did not measure with a stop watch) to load versus the 2.8s @ 4.7ghz.
COD4 isn't a good test... The 100app test is much better, however it is also much more difficult to replicate on different systems. Someone make a list of 100 free apps that we could DL. These apps can't include anything that scans your hardware config (like 3dmarks) because that has nothing to do with speed and will just take different amounts of time depending on your hardware.
We've seen a camcord of the reboot time. That can't be cached. We've seen the 100-app bat run. That could be cached, but really, at this point, I'm prepared to take Napalm's word for it.
But you can´t use this theoretical value in practise ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by noobieocer
~ 1600MB/s. with cache and ~ 800MB/s. without cache
The 1231/1261/1280ML have no soldered write-cache. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulsCollective
You must remove the original ram-module (256GB) before using other modules
omg i just notice this thing is expensive! :O
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Areca...-plus-Ethernet
Yeah they are! That's why I would like to see comparisons between the new MegaRAID SAS 9260-4i ($328) and these Areca's ($800) to make the best decision ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by noobieocer
Hm, it´s really expensive in uk.Quote:
Originally Posted by noobieocer
In GER you pay 600€ or £510
Makes sense, I get 5 seconds with 3x Vertex & 1x x25-m.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
Hmm, I will have to experiment with that on my systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
I thought the same thing too. It makes it hard for anywone else to verify/test.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
Hang on a minute, you're contradicting yourself here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerlad
This is getting ridiculous, it's up to you if you either take his word for it or if you don't believe it, but don't waste his time with your petty arguments.
I believe him. Others are the ones that want more info.
What does it matter anyway- it's all on a stripped down computer. What does Napalm have installed on the machine he's doing all these tests on? What kind of functionality in Windows is he missing because of his stripped OS?
Maybe he wants to challenge me :shrug: :D
flash-based SSDs vs. DRAM-based SSDs ;)
It seems to me he was able to run 100 perfectly usable apps with no loss of 'functionality' ;) Play some pretty intensive games, massively linked apps like OpenOffice, run a lot of Windows' built-in utilities, etc. Stripped down to the point of just being a benchmark beater is very, very different to just being well-optimized.Quote:
Originally Posted by Griff805
That's...what I just said :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
That was the appload test you're talking about. I'm talking about the latest video with just the start/stop timer script.Quote:
Originally Posted by karbonkid
^ lol you havent even watched the vids.. watch the 100app+games loadup vid its all there :shakes:
you guys have made it very clear from lestat to griff805 to onehertz to rhys to nizzen to whomever.. you guys resort to/say anything to put down/discredit/poop on my vids without any merit.. and thats fine i guess it comes with the territory.. when your systems cant come close/match any of the vids ive posted
thus i wont post anymore vids because the results/vids will be the same thus your responses will be same thus the outcome will be the same thus i wont waste anymore of my time
these vids are just foreplay.. you havent seen the wrath of the system.. until any of you pose a threat.. im waiting for someone to bring smtg to challenge/surpass my system
anyways.. to the rest of you.. thanks for and i appreciate the kind comments :toast:
I believe in you Napalm :up:
Areca FTW :D
I watched the videos- and in the last one it wasn't clear if that was the same install or not. All I saw was the single icon on the screen, am I supposed to assume that it is the same system? Just tell me it is and I'm fine with that, I didn't see it mentioned. I never accused you of lying. It'd be pointless for you to lie about this stuff, because it's not that big of a deal anyway. It's just an e-penis thing-Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
I agree though- don't waste anymore time with videos, you've already posted what has needed to be seen. I think it's crazy to be able to load a game that quick though, more power to ya- Wasn't tryin' to hate. :shrug:
Forum Vs Naplam ---> Napalm WIN :cool:
That does it, I call BS on everything except the bootup!Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
How could you be offended just because people actually want you to prove your statements instead of just taking your word for it.
This is how the many get screwed by the few! they just keep taking their word for it.
I went to space in a rocket ship a few years ago, and I can even show you a video of the rocket taking off!
But I know if I posted it, you would all say I just got it off the internet or would make unreasonable requests such as ask for video or even pics of me inside it.
You guy's will probably resort to/say anything to put down/discredit/poop on my vid. and then I will get offended and declare no more vids because you guys wouldn't believe it anyway!
Amazing! Was it a nice trip Rhys? A real rocket wow, that just kicks ass.
well Im convinced Napalm's setup is pretty darn fast, but I just can't belive there arn't anyone here who can do it better :)
Yep! 3Dgameman came with me and he also said it was 100% Kick Ass!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mic
I think you need to find something better to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
Sure, making a request about the video or for more information is fine, but when people ask over and over again for more and more - That is the problem.
Are you just trying to be a :banana::banana::banana::banana: to him or something ?
:down:
Quote:
Originally Posted by yngndrw
What I/we wanted was an honest video that showed the performance that was being achieved was genuine.
It would't have taken him any more effort to do it right in the first place, but he chose not to, and as it was such a basic request I have to wonder why he seems so reluctant to be transparent.
I call it how I see it! and at this point in time it looks like BS.
If it's not I will gladly apologise, but if it is then I think my comments will have been vindicated.
:bs: :down:
yeh right.. backstabberQuote:
Originally Posted by Nizzen
no hating all love :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Griff805
its the same system/xp/everything/typical bootup/reboot.. i guess the diff wallpaper threw you off goodness gracious :shakes:
yeh this is all epeen this aint xs.. with all the records/results posted here @ xs none of that is epeen but this totally is
you guys brought the challenge to me.. ive brought vids.. none of you can match thus it all has to be bs/epeen.. but of course
exactly what i brought to the challenge.. honest/genuine performance.. all vids are no diff than the otherQuote:
Originally Posted by Rhys
dont forget i was the one that asked for your requests.. but you guys pooped all over that
you guys are making it like i got some kind of alien thingy in my rig that i have to prove relentlessly.. its a freaking product all of you can try yourselves.. you certainly got the money for it
you know rhys.. you bow to which ever direction the wind blows.. thats you
If you replace the word 'wind' with evidence your right!Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
Napalm please explain why you won't film the whole thing from start to finish?
i.e. we want to see the begining of the bootup process from when your finger hits the power switch and then the loading of the bat file and games.
I have stated repeatedly if you can show that, then I'm an Areca believer and this whole argument is over!
Just because I said it could be even faster with cache loading?Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
I have ssd's + Areca, and I know how fast things is :)
Hi F.E.A.R. So you have the almost the same controller but (I think) faster ssd's and more ram? Is your system as fast as napalms?Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
What ssd's are you using and how many are in your array? Is it as fast/ faster than napalm set up?Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
2x Acard 9010 @ Quad-Raid 0
I haven´t try comparison.
I would like to see someone show us the difference between IICH9/10 and these areca setups using the ssd's that will just about hit ICH cap.
Any app loading script will do...
That's what I like to see determined!
Nice set up :cool: Are you being modest? Maybe napalm's cod loading time seems to be in slow motion?Quote:
Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.
I think I have done some of this - not realworld though - just benches -Quote:
Originally Posted by XS Janus
4x acard on ich10 -
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=229410
acards on areca 1680ix-12 -
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=229654
single acard on ich10 -
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=229759
6x acard on areca 1231ML -
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=230444
6x acard on ich10 -
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=230371
Granted this is dram based but comparisons between ich10 and areca should still apply (I think).
Someone send me what you would like to test I can do ich10 vs 1231ML-2G for either acards (up to 6xR0) or mtron mobi 3000's (up to 7xR0).Quote:
Originally Posted by XS Janus
ich10r vs areca - which one wins? Depends totally on the workload you pick.
A lot of sequential - generaly areca with 2GB cache rules,
A lot of random - if after the cache runs out - ich10 rules due to lower latency.
This is true for the acards - I think this is also true on the mtrons but I probably need to check that to be sure.
some version of a direct connect pcie to flash or even better - direct connect to dram with a battery should blow all of the above away big time.
No sata or southbridge bottlenecks!
I wonder if ioxtreme will be it or should we look for another?
Sorry to hijack Napalm's thread but SteveRo do you plan to test these any time soon: LSI MegaRAID 9260?Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveRo
Watching the COD 4 vid, Napalm, I find the loading of the game much faster than my onboard, but the load time of the "blackout" mission seemed about the same, or slower.. Is that the Cache?