how much cache are you using with the raid controller?
you know that HDD test in 05 doesnt mean much right
Printable View
how much cache are you using with the raid controller?
you know that HDD test in 05 doesnt mean much right
130.000 points in Vantage ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
4G but with no OC on PCIE or CPU or memory or VGA
it's all in the cache mate it doesnt matter what you clocks are
Not if u r not using it for Read Ahead or what so everQuote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
your disk write cache is enabled. can you disable it or use a 1GB stick and compare also?
intels dont have onboard cache and the settings for the controllers is write through so no cache for write back ;)
i'm confused
i used write back cache via write though with irams on 1231ML
u cant run Write back Cache and Write through at the same time :S
im not talking about the cache memory that some SSD's have im talking about the cache that controller uses.
strange thing is the results were also extremely high and iram is even slower than SSDs
slower?? u mean in MB/s because in latency i dont think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
and belive me latency has something to do with PCmark05 and Vantage :)
yes some things iram is quicker but some slower also. i've done benching with SSDs on raid controller and ICH and iram also.
can you explain what you mean by latency and what it impacts
random low k files read and write :)
here is some good results with Areca 1880ix ( i hope now dinos will understand what im talking about)
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcmv=384262
Main test results
PCMarkSuite N/A
Memories Suite N/A
TV and Movies Suite N/A
Gaming Suite N/A
Music Suite N/A
Communications Suite N/A
Productivity Suite N/A
HDD Test Suite 157756
HDD Test Suite
HDD 1
HDD - Windows Defender 865.85 MB/s
HDD 2
HDD - gaming 615.9 MB/s
HDD 3
HDD - importing pictures to Windows Photo Gallery 825.67 MB/s
HDD 4
HDD - Windows Vista startup 796.93 MB/s
HDD 5
HDD - video editing using Windows Movie Maker 606.29 MB/s
HDD 6
HDD - Windows Media Center 1231.71 MB/s
HDD 7
HDD - adding music to Windows Media Player 406.86 MB/s
HDD 8
HDD - application loading 798.4 MB/s
hey mate
i just looked at one of my old 150K HDD score results and i am much stronger in some tests but also much weaker in others
here is one that i am interested to know more about
HDD - application loading
how do you get that exactly....are you saying that it's the new controller or what's the deal?
its just using my controller without the cache :)
no read ahead and everything that has to do with cache
do you still have the 1231ML to compare?
no i just have LSI models (like a maniac) its my first areca and i have to study it first and then run a full public test ;)
here is some results from SiSoftware Sandra Benchmarks.
i have for the moment the first place :P
steve i think i am finally working this controller out, youve always had me by a long way in the hdd tests, but i think i am finally getting there!
Good morning Mr. Youngpro,Quote:
Originally Posted by youngpro
Yes, there is always a better sweet spot - just a matter of how much time you need to invest to find it.
... Let's see - what was my wife's first name? ...
Wow Mr. Tilt - great numbers my friend!
Mr stevero long time to see u online u should log in we have many things to discuss ;) :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveRo
Hello Boys,
I have a little problem with perfomace. If you look on graph (8k 75% Read and 100% Random test), you will see that Areca 1800ix have a poor perfomance compared with older controller.
NAVISIONSQLEVRO is our old SQL server ... HP DL580 G3 with Smart Array 6400, 512MB cache + battery.
NAVISION is a Supermicro server with Areca 1800ix-16 controller and ten disks Toshiba 2.5" 147GB SAS 2.0 15k. (RAID10, 64k strip size, battery, write back.)
I tried to change Volume Data Read Ahead normal to Conservative/Disbled. Random read/write perfomace didn't change. Only seq. read is lower.
IO Meter test:
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/8757/areca.png
Please help :)
Mr. Vodokotlic - please send complete controller and storage array settings.
Sounds like yo've already started down the right path - you need to benchmark each alternative configuration and select the best for your application.
F/w used?
storport?
TCQ enabled when the volume was created?
ncq?
HDD read ahead?
volume read ahead (you have adjusted some already sounds like)?
write caching enabled?
what raid config?
Stripe size of arrays?
cluster size of partitions? ...
Others should chime in but my approach would be to allocate a lot of time to try test as many likely optimums as possable.
lol wtfQuote:
Originally Posted by SteveRo
how high do you think these platforms can go steve?
i reckon 46-47k
NEW beta firmware build WOOOHOO!!
ftp://ftp.areca.com.tw/RaidCards/BIO...a/Build101006/
With that uber 980 you have under ln2 - I agree - 46 or betterQuote:
Originally Posted by youngpro
installed fine, yet to test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
i dont see any diff. with the new firmware :S
with the amazing 1880 i think 47/48 is possible!
Mr Anvil Sir, do you remember what your stripe size was for this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I'm playing with 5xC300/64's (on the 1880/4GB) and trying to match you before I continue on to other benches. :)
Tested new firmware. All is stable and working well I think :p:
GAH steve you devil! oh jesus i think you are gonna do great things with those C300! now i will have to rely on my top secret 990X and G3 plan to rule the world MUHAHAH....OOPS! :doh:Quote:
'm playing with 5xC300/64's (on the 1880/4GB) and trying to match you before I continue on to other benches.
@nizzen, nice result!
Tilt
i agree, but i havent delved very deeply yet tbh, much going on here...Quote:
i dont see any diff. with the new firmware :S
Cannot get the firmware file to upload. Consistently tells me I did not click on the confirm button and aborts upload. Other files upload fine. I reverted back to the original (official) since the other file(s) uploaded successfully and I did not want to leave the controller in a (possibly) unusable state on the next reboot! :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
Tried both firefox and msie through http. That's the way I always upgrade firmware on these cards.
Rubycon - odd, sounds like yu've done this before so probably not user error.
could just be a bad download, did you try to download again?
longshot - but try to connectin an alternative fashion - either through the card's ethernet or through the arc http on the same machine?
Good morning CT, so far the c300's seem just about on par with the acards, I will post what I have soon. probably start a new thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
Hi Steve,Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveRo
I'll try to find out, can't remember but off the top of my head my best guess would be either 4K or 32K.
How are the tests coming along?
steve-o have you oc'd the pci-e yet? whats yer max?
pcie max is 106 if I'm lucky.
according to Areca the beta firmware mainly added support for SED's (Self Encrypting Drives), rather than performance tweaks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
also, someone asked about using newer drives with 4K sectors (Samsung F4, Western Digital, etc) with the 1880i, and whether they should specify LBA64 or 4k in the dropdown when creating a volume. it's easy to why this is confusing but addressing method has nothing to do with what size sectors a drive has, so you want to use LBA64 for drives 2TB and greater. i double-checked with Areca to make sure, and they confirmed.
gah! wonder when the new drivers will come around?Quote:
according to Areca the beta firmware mainly added support for SED's (Self Encrypting Drives), rather than performance tweaks.
I dunno, but I've been loading them up with all kinds of feature requests that I told them they need to implement if they want to stay ahead of the competition.
- Raid-7.N -- new RAID classification for triple-parity and/or an arbitrary number of parity stripes. Thus 7.1 would be equal to RAID5, 7.2 would be equal to RAID6, 7.3 would be triple parity, and so on). Various papers have been written on how Triple Parity will be critical and "the new RAID6", since throughput has not been keeping pace with increasing drive sizes. When you see charts with Time To Failure comparison between a RAID6 and a triple-parity array, the triple-parity is very compelling.
- File system awareness, beginning with NTFS and the major *nix file systems. like ZFS, the option to operate only on blocks actually in use, which would also usher in things like TRIM support). Major overhaul of O/S host driver would obviously be required.
- Wider stripes. Right now we're maxed at 128k. Let's talk about 1024k, 2048k or 4096k for a top end. Not that 4096k would necessarily benefit most usage patterns, but some other vendors already provide 1024k. Not to mention in a triple or quad parity scheme, stripe width will have to increase as drive sizes continue to increase, so that write performance isn't held up by the IOP. Unless they just want to keep building bigger and bigger IOPs (quad core anyone).
and a few other things the competition would probably curse jesus for if Areca put it out first.
EVGA SR-2 with areca is ON ;)
ok i have SR2 on my hands but i miss 2-3 inches inside the case hahahahahah. I cant place my SR-2 in to my case :D
TILT PUT IT ON YOUR DESK for the love of christ! Remember that 775 rig i showed you just setting on the desk, man do the same thing! get some cardboard and lay it down and lets get it on! :) :) :)
i have things to do in the AM ya know the lobster is preggo so off to the doctor for checkup, but i will be on by 10:00 PM athens time, so lets see what ya got :)
plus 500 on this! yes they need larger stripe size for sure, the arecas love those small ones, but big ones are definitely usefull as well :)Quote:
- Wider stripes. Right now we're maxed at 128k. Let's talk about 1024k, 2048k or 4096k for a top end
i couldnt agree more. the latest SCSI spec has the neccesary implements to make trim a reality, they need to go with this, big time :)Quote:
- File system awareness, beginning with NTFS and the major *nix file systems. like ZFS, the option to operate only on blocks actually in use, which would also usher in things like TRIM support). Major overhaul of O/S host driver would obviously be required
+1 with CT, Mr Tilt - just set it up on a table as CT said.
SR-2 and 1880!!!
I hope these big guys play well together!
All right Mr. Tiltevros!
Excellent work my friend - new 8x cpu Pcmark Vantage World Record! - :up::up::up:
http://hwbot.org/community/submissio...20_20913_marks
You should be able to shatter this when you get your SR-2 dialed in! :yepp:
LOL he has POWER!!! now to overclock that beast :) tilt where are you? get in MSN :)
awesome, you finally have a big record, and you havent even started yet :) congrats!:clap:
Hi all ,
First of all thanks to the mod's for allowing me to post here!
I have been reading thru this thread and it has already proven to be a very valuable learning experience to me.
I'm going to build my first home storage server but I'm still in doubt over some components.
The case I have ordered is the Norco RPC-4224 wich will arrive here next week!
Motherboard is a P5Q-WS, CPU C2D E6750, RAM 6GB DDR2 PC6400 (these will all be replaced by a Xeon configuration in the future).
For PSU I'm thinking about the Corsair AX850 or maybe the AX1200 although the latter might be overkill ....
The Raid controller I would like to buy is the ARC-1880ix-24
Now since I would like to run all HDD's directly from the Areca (hence the ...ix-24) I'm a bit puzzled about wich drives to get.
I have read several horror stories about the Areca cards and drive compatibility so I'm asking here before I run to the store and buy me a couple of drives
For the moment I'm considering either the Hitachi 7K2000 2TB and the Samsung F4EG 2TB ... or should I wait a bit for the Hitachi 7K3000 2TB or the 5K3000 2TB?
Reliability is the most important factor to me, then comes price and then performance (although a nice fast RAID6 is very welcome ).
Also I would like to start off with 8 drives in a RAID6 configuration and then add more drives as the need for more space grows. Is online expanding bad for the performance of the array or does this not make a difference?
Sorry for the many questions but as I said, it is my first attempt to a home storage server ...
Thanks in advance for any help and replies !!!
Hitachi 7K2000 2TB works well with my Arc 1880 ix-24 :up:
Now I am testing Samsung f4 2tb in raid-5. So far so good :up: Looks like we have a cheap winner for Areca :)
Not much performanceloss wit raid-5 vs raid-0. (read)
Firs a small array:
Nizzen what is ur maximum Mb/s with 1880 and SSD in HD tach??
After 3 weeks, does the beta firmware is stable?Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
oh yea, no issues. seems the battery issue is fixed too.
What is the battery issues? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
a rare occurrence thankfully. basically if for some reason you get a 'bad' initialization on your card, when the bios is booting up (which is also rare), you cant get the card to reboot until you remove the BBU, and then boot. it is like if there is a bad load of the card bios the BBU keeps the bad info or whatever in there even after you reboot. that is my hypothesis at least of what is going on with it. i have only seen one other user have it happen to him, so may be a certain 'like' combination of hardware.
you're right CT, i've had the battery issue too, once on each of my two 1880i's, to the point I just removed my BBU's.
i'm able reproduce it by the rare occasion that I have one of my Hitachi 1TB or 2TB drives show a "timeout" in the event log, which on rare occasions occurs when an array is waking up from being spun down. the whole areca card locks up and the server has to be hard reset. then unless I remove the battery the areca won't init its bios.
the issue appears to be a combination of setting too low of a spinup time (i.e. 0.4 or 0.7 seconds) in HDD power management in the Areca webgui, and certain models of harddisks. the problem used to be WAY worse on the 1680 series cards, and has all but gone away on the 1880's. its also not limited to the Hitachi drives (i've seen it happen on some seagates too). i'm still trying to narrow down exactly what causes it, areca's been no help and says "the drive isn't a raid edition, which doesn't mean we don't want to fix it, but rather we won't get help from the drive manufacturer in trying to troubleshoot it with a raid controller."
I'm not ready to declare Samsung F4 a cheap winner for Areca just yet, I have 4 and want to buy more since the Hitachi 2Tb's have all dried up and they haven't released the new 6Gbps gen yet, and before I buy anymore F4's I want to determine if the data loss issue (link below) isn't one that affects these drives on an Areca in RAID or JBOD mode. I only heard about this yesterday so I haven't had time to determine if this is just FUD or a legitimate issue that affects more than just the hardware combos they tested:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nizzen
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sma...gF4EGBadBlocks
I had this issue with 1680ix-24s that were running arrays with 6-16+ SAS 15K drives (Fujitsu MBA series). Only if the system were suddenly powered off, sometimes a blue screen and subsequent shutdown would cause it.
Even if the power was disconnected from the mains a faint beeping every few seconds could be heard. If the machine was restarted it would hang after mainboard POST.
Removing the ribbon cable on the BBU would restore operation.
Have not seen this with our 1880s yet however 90% of our testing has been done WITHOUT the BBU. ;)
That sounds like the standard behavior of areca controllers when they have disk cache which was not written to the disks. Of course the hanging after boot is not normal.
When it is 'Waiting for Firmware' it will typically write disk cache to the drives which is why it can sit on this screen longer than normal (I have seen disks show major disk activity for 5+ seconds while this happens).
Its very rare that I see it totally hang on that unless there is a problem with one of the drive in the array and the controller is unable to write the data to the drive during array initialization. The few times I have seen this one of the drive had to be pulled shortly after due to errors.
I got video of it happening last January here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaoIDEnbR0o
Hi everyone. I have just recently ordered an 1880ix-24 with the standard 1GB from Provantage (best price @ $1120 at the time). I've read through this thread, and it seems like no one's been able to source a 4GB module that will work reliably a-la-cheap, i.e. under $150. I see that Areca itself has a SKU for it's own certified memory module (as shown here), but that's $253 as of this post. I'd like to upgrade, but I'll be damned if I spend $250 for what is, at best, $110 worth of memory -- registered, ECC or otherwise... So, what I also thought was peculiar while reading the SKU description, is that it says it is "for Arc-1880IX Series Only, 4GB, 240P, PC2-6400, CL5,36C, 256X4, Registered ECC, DDR2"... does anyone notice a few things that pop out right away? First, is the 36C, the next is that it's described as 256x4 -- not 256x8! So that gets me thinking -- will it really accept 256x4 in a 36 chip config? maybe even 512x4 in an 18 chip config? Has anyone actually tried a few of those variables out, or found any reliable inexpensive source of memory that will work, or spoke to Areca on the subject of RAM for the 1880 series?
Thanks in advance for your input.
Mr. Computurd has spoken to Areca.
It is a difficult problem.
I had to return 2 sets of RAM that i thought would work and did not.
Other folks also had to return sticks as well.
I ended up spending the $ for the Areca memory - works finebut a shame the price is so high.
Thanks for that insight, Steve.
Is the general consensus such that it is not worth playing with ordering RAM that might work, only to find out it doesn't, and to just bite the bullet and go with Areca's own endorsed SKU? I really was hoping someone would have had luck with another (less expensive) brand. It's too bad there are those unresolved, unanswered questions about the Mushkin part.
yes, the ram issue is a tough one. the kingston 2gb stick is a good value, and it works i have one. the kingston 4gb stick is discontinued from manufacturing, but you can find them for 400 dollars usd.
the unigen ram works beautifully, and you might just have to bite the bullet on it. i rmad tons of sticks trying to find a cheaper way out, but no dice.
tbh 250 isnt that bad for it. the mushkin will not work if memory serves correctly, but i did not test it personally.
Honestly I would not mess around trying to find a module that works!
Unigen is certified and works perfectly. Even if you find one that seems to work you may find out later that you have issues. At least 1bit DRAM (ECC) errata will make the controller beep.
4GB is a great amount of information to be trusting to a buffer that may not be solid. If it's for play and it matters not if you hose your array/data contents, etc. and restoring an image is fine then I suppose "playing around" with other modules is ok.
By Unigen, do you all mean the "ARC-3404GB" part from Areca as sold on Provantage?
Yes that looks like the same one here:Quote:
Originally Posted by Siobhan
http://www.pc-pitstop.com/sas_contro...ARCRMD24G8.asp
I tried the mushkin (proline) memory - it did not work in my areca 1880.
Had to return it.
new firmware! :)
ftp://ftp.areca.com.tw/RaidCards/BIO.../149-20101210/
Can't find the Firmware Release Note yet. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
Release Notes? What is that Areca? :p
The biggest reason for me to upgrade to this is Finally the 500 ARC-1222 controllers that are used at work can have disks failed remotely. When a disk keeps getting read/timeout errors and the controller doesn't kick it and its causing issues to the point of the machine just about locking up I no longer have to manually pull the drive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wintel64
This is a very important feature due to the fact that around 300 of our areca servers are in a data center around 16 miles from our primary one which we do not normally have on-site staff. I asked areca to implement this a while ago so I am really happy they did even though they did not explicity mention it in the changelog:
Changelog:
********* Change Log For V1.49 Firmware
2010-1-8
1 Improve SMP support for ARC1680
2010-1-27
1 ARC1680/1212/1682 4.9.2.0 transport firmware N.G. for some HDDs
use 4.7.3.0
2010-2-4
1 Fix VOLUME_FAILED cause controller to hang
2010-4-8
1 ARC1880:1st release
2010-4-12
1 Add:HP SAS EXP Card 2.02 support
2010-4-15
1 SAS_HOST_MODE:support 6G expander
ARC1680 ....
ARC1880/8040 ....
2 ARC1880/8040:change STACK_SIZE_LOW to avoid problem when LCD panel or VT100
operate HDD fucntion
3 ARC1880/8040:Add LCD initialization strings (test SDRAM ...)
2010-4-16
1 LCD panel:remove checking of MAX 3 hot spare
2010-4-19
1 CheckMigratingX:added for migration failed but migration status is
inconsistent
2 Remove inconsistent fail flag for raid6 migration
2010-4-29
1 Improve checking of spurious SCB/IO, move the check to LinkErrorDevHandle
2 Fix removing of failed HDD hang the system
2010-4-30
1 ARC1880/8040:Fix LSI6G PLI implementation of Start/StopUnit and SATA
passthrough problem
2010-5-5
1 SUPPORT_CHANGE_CAPACITY:after volume capacity is expanded, return check
condition with CAPACITY DATA Changed
2010-5-7
1 ARC1880/8040:RaidInitZero may break, because raid may be freed before
init routine to complete
2 During volume check of RAID4/5/6, hot removing of entire raidset will cause
raidNumberOfDevices to 0, and checking routine will hang
2010-5-12
1 Fix when expasion raidset and target disk failed, after migration pasued
and controller restarted, the migration halted
2010-5-14
1 Add DISK_WRITE_CACHE_SETTING for models without BBU to control disk write
cache mode
2010-5-17
1 Fix race condition for cache line allocation
2010-5-18
1 Fix SAS/SAS2 model's SPC3 compliance
2010-6-1
1 Add ThreadDelayMs to improve GUI speed of PCI host adapter
2010-6-4
1 Tune ARC1880 performance
2010-6-28
1 Fix ARC1880:1st level attached device's RED LED not on if device removed
2010-6-29
1 Enclosure.c:Add space between E%d and %s
2010-7-2
1 ARC1880:fix zoning problem
2010-7-5
1 ARC1880/1680:Add 6G expander zoning support
2010-7-20
1 Fix TEST_ZONING with log
2 Fix enclousre power off with raidset is initializing or rebuilding...
2010-7-27
1 ARC1880:modify geteon delay stepping,
2010-7-28
1 Add support for mail greet pause, use different tcp_send timeout value
2010-7-29
1 Fix raidset activate problem for rebuilding percentage
2010-7-30
1 Add display of Error Recovery Control Status of SATA hdd
2010-8-19
1 Modify pure SATA's NEW_83782D_HWMON SNMP
2010-8-20
1 Patch ARC1880 bootcode for PLI Phase6/7
2010-8-30
1 Add CheckEesaBlackList to exclude some HDD with error recovery control
problem
2010-9-2
1 Add SUPPORT for ARC1880IXL-8
2010-9-9
1 ARC1880:fix return from BBM with 4G sdram
2010-9-16
1 Fix when many volumes is created for RAID6 and failed two drive, some volume
may still NEED_REBUILD and REBUILDING
2010-9-17
1 Fix SAS devices add/remove routine is invoked before SasDeviceInit is called
2010-10-6
1 Add support for ARC1880LP
2010-10-7
1 Modify GetResource and PostResource
2010-10-15
1 Fix write through problem for IOP348 based HBA
(0) ARC1680/1212/1682/SPT1680/WTN1212
(A) Only ARC1680 reveal the problem
(B) The problme occurred if SUPPORT_PERSISTENT_RESERVE is defined
(C) The problem is the STACK overflow if write through
(D) Change stack size for All IOP348 models
2010-10-20
1 Fix reportlun command to exclude FAILED and FOREGROUND init volume
2010-10-21
1 ARC1680:Add LARGE_DEV_LBA support
2010-10-22
1 SAS2 target mode:ARC8040/8066/8366
2010-10-28
1 Fix MRVL5182 based more than 2TB hdd support
2010-11-3
1 ARC1682:Add over 2TB hdd support
2010-11-5
1 ARC1680:remove VerifyDrive to support seagate SED drive
2010-11-25
1 Add NO_UPS_STATUS for enclosure.c to remove ENC without UPS status
2 Patch supermicro SES problem, unsupported power state report value 6
2010-11-30
1 Add rename raidset name support
2 Port ARC1880 subsystem
4 Add NEW_MAIL_ALERT_CONFIG to support different mail alert config for
different mail account
2010-12-2
0 V1.49 20101202
1 All PCI/E HBA models (except 1880)
2010-12-10
1 V1.49 20101210
2 ARC1880
Mailed Areca. got answer from 2 different people in areca:
1. Is there a new FW? I did not know about that
2. There is a new FW, it was made after a client request
LOL nizzen, Areca does seem to be very vague about their FW updates...no big changlelogs etc...i havent really tested the new version very much, been very busy. but i do have it on here and it seems to be working very well...
Found the firmware changelogs in Areca FTP yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
ftp://ftp.areca.com.tw/RaidCards/BIO...lease_note.txt
And it says nothing usefull...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wintel64
2010-12-10
1 V1.49 20101210
2 ARC1880
:shrug: :down:
It would be wrong to assume that new files showing up on Areca's ftp means new official firmware. A version is official when its posted to Areca's website. The answer you got from #2 (I assume Kevin) was correct, there are many interim builds between official releases, often to resolve specific client issues or solve a trouble ticket.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nizzen
I'd also recommend against loading every new interim firmware build on any card that has critical data, or data that isn't backed up elsewhere. Otherwise you're essentially a beta tester for new builds, which is probably fine with most people on this forum, but not necessarily production or business environments.
---------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0 x64 Beta2 (C) 2007-2009 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sequential Read : 2051.004 MB/s
Sequential Write : 2501.950 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 2013.462 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 2312.495 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 142.171 MB/s [ 34709.7 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 130.329 MB/s [ 31818.6 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 474.288 MB/s [115793.0 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 387.749 MB/s [ 94665.3 IOPS]
Test : 4000 MB [C: Used 3.9% (23.2/596.1 GB)]
Date : 2010/12/24 13:51:16
OS : Windows 7 Ultimate Edition [6.1 Build 7600] (x64)
Hi Tilt :)
Great result at 4KB QD1.
Isn't it time for you to get some 6Gb/s SSDs?, those Intels are getting long in the tooth from all your testing :)
:P haha anvil be my sponsor hehehe
Im waiting for the G3 series ;)
I got my arc-1880ix-12-4g today and here is the first results with fresh install 4 X Vertex 2 60 gb.128 kb stripe.I'm still working on it...
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=24nlklj&s=7
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=s2xhdh&s=7
Your tests show that your cache is working and not much else.
good latency though thule...what board are you using?
thanks computurd.my board is ASUS Rampage III ExtremeQuote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
which test/s you recommend?Quote:
Originally Posted by odditory
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 827.360 MB/s
Sequential Write : 376.678 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 2163.562 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 342.002 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 230.937 MB/s [ 56381.2 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 171.681 MB/s [ 41914.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 460.244 MB/s [112364.2 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 245.714 MB/s [ 59988.9 IOPS]
Test : 4000 MB [D: 0.1% (0.1/186.3 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2010/12/29 23:41:32
OS : Windows 7 Ultimate Edition [6.1 Build 7600] (x64)
do this
elevate cmd prompt to admin status
type in:
winsat disk
then post screenie plz thule :)
hi computurd.there are two volumes in a single raid 0 array.stripe size 128 kb.(4x60gb ocz vertex 2) drive c is 40 gb and drive d is 200 gb.here is the results for both volumes.
interesting. why two volumes in raid if i may ask? why not one volume?
Nothing special.I want to try volume set function of this card. OS is at drive c.If you want I can give you same results with a single volume.
here is the results for single volume.
now those are excellent results. your 4k@qd1 is damn good! :)
your seq read numbers are a bit low for 2 reasons..
1. you seem to be in steady-state with those devices
2. compression algorithms with the SandForce mumbo-jumbo
either way, those are great results :)
thanks for your comments computurd.your comments are important for me.because after this topic, I decided to buy this great card.do you recommend any ssd for me?or I continue with these ssd's for a definite period?
On the other hand I bought my 1880ix with 4gb memory cache from newegg.But my cache memory is not unigen.I will post the picture of it.and the BBU is necessary for performance?Is it worth to buy?
bbu is great for stability for sure, but not necessary. i would reccomend it. i would be interested to see your ram very very interested. i wouldnt see a problem sticking with your disks. the only other thing is wait and see what new is coming out, g3 look interesting.
here is the pictures;It's "inphi" product and I love it...
4g not from unigen? :eek:
I bet it is imposible to buy alone and if you can it is the same prize as unigen?
If it is cheaper and it is possible to buy, too bad for me :yepp:
I`ve already got 4g unigen :)
Hi nizzen.I googled the arc-rmd24g8 product code (you can see at the first picture) and found a product at tekram's website. 250 usd :D
http://tekram.com/store/product_info...roducts_id=161
Thule, i know several people who are gonna be happy about that find! good stuff, wow i get asked all the time where the heck to find in USA and people always have probs :)
oops! hold the phone! that is only 533 speed, the areca can do 800!