continue
Printable View
continue
and contin.
card seems to have IOPS limit of around 70k :(. My card is still on its way because newegg sucks.
oh yes there are limitations with this card when used for its integrated raid..great for dynamic disk usage though you really cant beat it at that!
i am doing real world testing on it now. i am testing the level load times on l4d but cmon, they suck. those maps are small. gonna do some crysis load times too etc...any other suggestions for load time testing?
If you can do some Crysis, Crysis:Warhead, UT3, Far Cry 2, or any of the HL2's, I would be happy to compare them w/ my ioXtreme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
well i have crysis and l4d and supreme commander. there will not be any point to timing the supreme commander.forged alliance that loads to fast to to time. since you don't have the l4d maybe we could do crysis? if you would like to pick a few maps, time them then post it up i will run teh same maps and we can see how they compare. thanks!
both are the same controller. the more expensive one comes with cables.
well I got the card and installed everything but there is no difference in any game loading times from ICH... I am suspecting however that I am limited by windows XP as I know vista and 7 are better optimized.
That's disappointing. How about file transfers? How many devices do you have on your ICH?
try it as a dynamic disk yet?
idk about file transfers. Not something I ever cared about or measured in ICH. I turned ICH off entirely because it was hurting boot time. I have one storage HDD set up as IDE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Griff805
The array is working correctly. About 9XXMB/s reads and 7XXMB/s writes. 70kish 4kb random reads, 66k 4kb random writes. Access time is 0.07-0.08.
And this is w/ 4 X25-E's? If that setup nor an ioXtreme can scale w/ games and other real world tasks we have definitely hit a non-storage bottleneck then.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
one hertz
xp is not whats limiting you.. you got another sas controller in the hope (because some individual/s shows you iometer ?? :shakes:) of getting close/match/beat areca iop341 ?!? tsk tsk
let me remind you yet again @ real apps theres nothing faster than areca iop341.. nothing!
I did pretty much expect this, but it was just $200 so no biggie :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
This card is really weird... It can NOT do large files. I mean, if I try reading or writing in blocks of more than say 512k, the performance drops to 200mb/s (performance of one drive). If I do 64-128k blocks or something in that ballpark, then it shows a lot of bandwidth. It's pretty screwed up. I just got into windows like an hour ago so I didnt get to play much yet. I will check it out some more tomorrow.
edit: kind of off topic, but damn a 30GB agility is very noticeably slower than an X25-E. This, I did not expect. Using an agility now in my lappy and I have like a 3GB outlook pst file with dozens of thousands of emails and searching through it is like 2x slower on the agility :(.
What is the IA64 vs the regular i7 driver?
Would both run on W7x64?
Is there a performance difference?
Where is the f/w download for the 9211-8i?
The only download seems to be for the driver? -
http://www.lsi.com/storage_home/prod...le=EN&remote=1
Funny how the same people that think there is no difference between an OCZ drive and an Intel drive also think that raid 0 is so much better.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
I am giving them a few weeks to fix the sequential performance and if they do not I will be selling this card and going back to onboard raid. I was installing something large yesterday and it is just ridiculous how slow it is in comparison. 3 times slower than ICH10R. Large files copy at 159MB/s comparing to 400-450MB/s on ICH. The card is a nice way to decrease CPU load, but this is just annoying. I don't even understand how the people that made this card can fail so horribly at the simplest task that a raid0 array has to do.
Well, if I did not do heavy searching (which is basically random reads) like this then the difference really would be small. It all depends on the user... However the agility is definitely very rough around the edges. If you write to it too much at once (like 25GB) the sequential writes go to 7MB/s. No joke, 7. I first noticed this when I was imaging my X25-E onto the agility. Started off at a cool 100+mb/s and then kept dropping all the way down to 7.Quote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
have you tried the 9211 as a dynamic disk yet? i am curious of your impressions of that. yes there is a big problem with sequentials on this card, that is why later i posted it up. it really shines when used as a dynamic disk controller. other than that its usage will be limited unless you can fix the sequential it is not much use for me either. however, for those who have amd mobos this could be a major boon as a way to get off the horrible sb on those boards...not done playing with it though, been busy with work.
agility's blow +1 on that.
@stevero-your random 4k results with acards graphs that you posted are most impressive...i was wondering if you could do that with 4k sequential? i would love to see the throughput on those bad-boys at small file size!!
Good morning all, I still have a couple inches of snow yet to shovel - all told we got more than 30 inches in some places of Virginia. Lots of sore muscles and blisters - yuk.
Newegg delivered the controller on time – day before yeseterday.
All iometer runs in this post are on a gigabyte X58 extreme mobo with an i7 965 proc running at stock.
First a few complaints – it looks like the controller f/w rounds down each disk to the nearest GB. For larger disk drives this is generaly not an issue but for acard ram disks, every MB is precious – it would be nice if this could be fixed. Then – looks like the latest W7 driver on the website might have some problems - at least with my set up anyway.
The iometer tests run in this post are on a Gigabyte X58 extreme mobo with an i7 965 proc running at stock.
So the first test - this is the LSI 9211-8i with 8xacardR0 using LSI 9211 driver 20270 dated 20Feb09 - I think this is the driver version that shipped with W7 beta bld 7100:
Results file located here - http://dump.no/files/f24c8eba30cd/2_02_70_20Feb09.xls
http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/9...27020feb09.jpg
Then rerun the same test - this is the LSI 9211-8i with 8xacardR0 using LSI 9211 driver 20817 dated 17Jun09 – this is the latest version on LSI’s website:
Results file located here - http://dump.no/files/f24c8eba30cd/2_...n09_driver.xls
http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/8...un09driver.jpg
Notice the huge hit in seq reads? I will stick with the 20270 driver for the remainder of this post.
NOTE - THIS MAY HAVE BEEN A BAD POWER CABLE - DISCOVERED BAD CABLE ON WED, 30DEC
So lets see how seq reads vary based on transfer size:
Results file located here - http://dump.no/files/f24c8eba30cd/92...x_read__bw.xls
http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/7813/58652639.jpg
Somewhere around 128K - seq reads get pretty good – 1284MB/s. Firmware and/or driver need to be fixed to hold that kind of performance al the way up to 4MB+.
Next, I used acronis true image to move the same w7 partition to the LSI/acard array and run pcmark vantage
Tht pcmark vantage run below is LSI 9211-8i with 8xacardR0, on a gigabyte X58 extreme mobo with an i7 965 proc running at 4.35 (43x132) with mem at 1848 8-8-8:
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/8...antage9211.jpg
The current top 20 - http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/6674/top20.jpg
This run would rank 13th all time – not too bad considering the state of the firmware and the driver. If LSI can fix their s/w, for ~$230. this might be a real winner!
Hi GullLars. Will we see some nice graphs from all the work that SteveRo does? :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by GullLars
SteveRo, thanks for sharing your results. :)
nice results stevero- you are definitely on to something with that driver issue you pointed out, we need to get with lsi tech support to let them know there is an issue there, and that explains some of the strange results i have received. i take it you ran these as a dynamic disk>?
that number 11 on the all-time list is me BTW:up: i have no idea why my name isnt linked i have tried fixing it multiple times. i beat the next guy by one point, go figure! hes probably pissed off! that is with the 9260 however. i am going to run some tests with the different version of the firmware that really really opened up my eyes there! i have been wasting time lol.
GREAT job!!! Thanks!
Good morning, the previous tests where all using just the 9211 and the 8x acard drives. Below is the dynamic disk run 9211/ich10r 2x4xacardR0 -Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/1...2x4acardr0.jpg