29161.85iopsx32kb/1024=911.31mb/secQuote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
12356.5iopsx128kb/1024=1544.56mb/sec
7286.99iopsx4/1024=28.46mb/sec
seems right on.
Printable View
29161.85iopsx32kb/1024=911.31mb/secQuote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
12356.5iopsx128kb/1024=1544.56mb/sec
7286.99iopsx4/1024=28.46mb/sec
seems right on.
Did a run on each array with no changes to default settings other than test file size increased to 16GB.
1 GB test file, changed array to No Read Ahead...
You are not paying attention to what One_Hertz wrote. The problem is that the IOPS do not make sense. It makes no sense to have IOPS be higher for 32KB or 128KB blocks as compared to 4KB blocks (QD=1 for all cases).Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogerlad
I think its about time. There are some great minds in here and I think you have a solid program that's HW bot worthy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
@ uncle steve. Im glad you are okay.
Now we have a hurricane to deal with.. :(
Why not try a 16 gb testfile? ;)
1gb or 16 gb its still "cached" ;)
4gb, 8gb, 16gb
how did I do?
The 4GB test looks fine :up:
The other two test (8GB/16GB) shows that there is something weird going on on 32K and 128K random reads in some configurations.
(I'll have a look at it asap)
^^^
Just like Nizzen. Hopefully you find the culprit!
I knew the 8gb and 16gb tests were too good to be true. I thought I was a genius for a second. I didnt screw with any settings in Anvils bench utility except select the ssd test and changed the test size. Other than drive cache there is no write caching enabled or any read ahead or any write back. here is a msm screenshot of my settings. This is 2x 64gb m4 09 FW paired with a c300 64gb in (3 drive)raid0 on 9260-4i with a fastpath key. no cachecade. Let me know if you want me to try some other test parameters to help diagnose the problem. In the meantime I want to score another pair of 64gb m4's so I have 4 m4's on the lsi. They are going for $100 bux ea. now. Hey does anyone have 4x 64gb m4 09 FW in raid0 on the lsi or on z68 I can compare to?
I'll surely find out, it looks like it shows it's face at large test files + caching controllers.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
Thanks for the detailed report, will surely make it easier to reproduce :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by trans am
I might be able to make a comparison using 4x m4's. (sometime over the weekend)
sweet! thanks Anvil. I want to see those 4x m4 results on your 9260. You have 4x 64gb m4 or 4x 128? Should I get those 2 m4 64gb? They are 99.00 ea new on ebay free shipping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
At $99 ea I'd personally get them :), they are great value.
I'll most likely have both 64GB and 128GB available early/mid next week and both my 9260 as well as the 9265 is available so it could be interesting, especially with the new fw.
64GB M4 is $89.99 w/FS right now at the Egg.
sweet! I just saw it too. I just bought 2 more so I have 4 matched now.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
Attachment 119602Quote:
Originally Posted by trans am
Attachment 119603
What do you want to know????
http://i.imgur.com/MV6mF.jpg
M4256GB on 009
hey guys the 2 64gb m4 came from newegg today. the 89.00 deal was amazing!
I got them all matched now on the lsi card and I am stoked!
^^ wow! great numbers!
Love this software. If you want, I can host the new versions for you for free...just PM me.
sick, how do you like cachecade 2.0? Is that a server environment, or personal?
dude M4 is the SSD to beat. i cant tell you how much i love them. i will show you in pictures in a few days LOL.
Dont fret TA, there are some inconsistencies with your results, but that doesn't mean inconsistency with your performance. that is a helluva an array you have going. Dude even if they were double the price they are now i would recommend them over several of the other current gen ssds.
I set out the current gen of SSDs to see how it shook out, and the M4 is just IT.
Yeah, I love my M4 in my x220 too...so fast.