Mate... for the price of Raptors, a Seagate 15k.5 is not far, and that will give you SPEEEEEEEEEEEED :D (15k rpm, with 140 MB/s average trasnfer rate).
I just have to make sure they work on X7DA3's onboard SAS!
Printable View
Mate... for the price of Raptors, a Seagate 15k.5 is not far, and that will give you SPEEEEEEEEEEEED :D (15k rpm, with 140 MB/s average trasnfer rate).
I just have to make sure they work on X7DA3's onboard SAS!
WOW. I just blew away my existing RAID0 array. It had a 20GB boot partition - here's HDTach right before I did it:
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/9854/hd1tt7.png
Here's my new Intel Matrix RAID0 20GB boot volume
http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/3555/hd2qi3.png
Folks, this isn't just HDTach showing us things are faster, it actually IS faster! Before I would get 3.5 bars on the XP splash screen. Now I'm getting exactly 2!! I don't know how this is faster, but it is. My box boots faster and seems even snappier in Windows.
Both of these benchies were takin' on brand-new fresh builds with full boot-time defrags and BootVis traces. This is NOT placebo as I have blown away and recreated this array 4 different times in the last 2 days.
This friggin' rocks. I can't believe I just sped up my RAID0 Raptors more than they were.
Thanks Dom!
The more HDDs in RAID-0 the longer the access time. This is fact.
Its pretty much negligible, though.
I knew I wasnt completely crazy. I mean, all of the data about slicing/partitioning being the same proves otherwise but whether it be the write back caching enabled by software in windows or something the Intel Matrix is doing differently it definitely does speed things up a tad.
I am glad you have such great results!
i dunno i still think its just a way to trick the benchmark by only limiting just the first 20gb. Kinda like just reading it burst. What about the rest of the partition, what does the benchmark shows?
Well it is tricking the benchmark, that's not the point.
Obviously the rest of the drives (the other RAID0 volume) show up to be slower.
where is the option 2?? on P5WDH mobo?Quote:
Originally Posted by dominick32
i couldnt find it. the only option is Enable RAID .
Actually its not a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanometer
Math is baised on postulates and theorems that are "ASSUMED" to be true.
Further more there are contless examples that proove the "boldness" of your reasong to be more likely to be wrong then right. It used to be a "fact" that space was made of nothing, then it was a "fact" that it was made of magic either, now its a "fact" that its made of dark matter which accounts for something like 90% off all matter in the universe. I quote "fact" because its not really a fact.
The ONLY fact here is that technology is moving alot faster then we understand it and why and how it works.
Your "100% sure" faith would be more appropriate at your local church, this however is a place of science.
----------------------
@Dom
Great post, I will be looking in to this for sure, looks awsome so far. Thanks for letting us know your results.
u can only get this by having a intel motherboard? i would love to have a pci-e 8x(or16x) card wich i could put in the other x16 port since i dont want CF.
That and two 74gb adfd and i would be happy!
Sounds very interesting I'll have to test this for my self.
This is what I get on my 25Gb slice (2 x Seagate 320Gb 7200.10 RAID 0)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...nga/hdtach.png
Any good? :confused:
wow, that beats single raptors. Same random access but twice the transfer speed!
guys I have a single 74gig 16mb raptor.. can I you intel matrix?? hehehe :)
I'll bring this back from the dead.
After seeing so many benchmarks showing standard RAID0 to be of next to no benefit for gaming, I wonder if this is any different.
If anyone is considering switching their array over from standard to matrix, could you do some timed benchmarks of game level loading before and after? I think it would answer some questions for a lot of people and be of good benefit to the community.
I've 4 36GB 8MB Raptors and am running them all in RAID0.
So what should i do then to get the best and mind blowing speeds from them?
Stripe size and should i try this matrix raid on the drives?
I've no idea so please be nice to me and help. I will give credit for it i promiss
What motherboard do you have Pete?
Im gifted by having a ICH9R on a Maxiums Formula SE with a Yorkfield in there and 2GB DDR2 @ DDR1200 4-4-4-6Quote:
Originally Posted by Polizei
Sorry thats a bit of shamless plug, edit as needs be there mods!
Well, the way I did it was:
Enable RAID in the BIOS. I rebooted, and then upon reboot, started hitting Control + i to get into the RAID BIOS - your manual should tell you what you need to press to get into the RAID BIOS. I then selected which disks I wanted in the RAID array and what type of RAID. After choosing RAID 0, I got to choose the stripe size - I picked 64k. Seems ok for 2 disks. I saved all that and exited, rebooted once more. I booted into the regular BIOS, and then chose the new RAID array as the first boot device (or first hard drive boot device). Once that was done, put the Windows CD in, rebooted once more and installed Windows.
Thanks for that but i said i have the 4 already in RAID0, so i know how to do the raid array for all of them but i was talking about the uber fast matrix raid array.
Cntl + i is the std Intel control to acess it in BIOS posting/Rom init
What stripe size are you guys using for your raid 0?
4kb to prove a mate wrong that it mkes windows load slower (he said windows is built on small files so it will boot faster with it like that, yeah right)
4kb is way too small. 32k minimum.
Um, as far as I know, I though the Control + i was the Intel Matrix RAID?
If you read i was proving a so called little kid wrong as i can i have the time to do so by running the 4kb, i was running 64kb before!Quote:
Originally Posted by Polizei
Nope the IMR is a bit of windows softwear i think. The control + i is the ICHXR rom on the SB
Oh.. hmm.
Im curious how to set up the Matrix RAID now as well, if Control + i is NOT how you do it.