Acard ANS-9010 DDR2 RAM-drive review

Introduction:
Welcome to a review of the Acard ANS-9010 DDR2-based RAM-drive.
This is a review for a high-end storage component, so I feel that I have to set the expectations early: this is not a replacement for your terabyte drive, so if you start reading this expecting me to recommend it as an alternative to anything other than a super-fast SSD or 15k rpm SCSI/SAS array, you will be disappointed :)


Any person who had a Gigabyte i-Ram in his hands in the last few years (including myself), which is the only other mainstream RAM-based solid state drive (the term "mainstream" leaves products that cost $$$$ out of this condition) and was excited by its performance, eventually would have been through the "Why?" phase:
- Why won't Gigabyte release an updated model in 5.25" form factor, so that we are not limited by the PCI slots in our motherboard?
- Why won't they update their product with cheaper DDR2 ram?
- Why won't they update their product with one that can take more than 4Gb of ram?
- Why won't they release a SATA300 model, so that we are not capped at 133Mb/sec?
- Why won't they release a dedicated backup module for the i-Ram, now that flash memory is really cheap?
and so on.
A search in the XSystems forum for "i-ram" could show you some of the expectations people had.

From of all these "Why's", Gigabyte answered only on the first one, by releasing a 5.25" version of the i-Ram, but left all other problems unresolved.

So, before I start this review, I would like to thank Acard not just for giving me the opportunity to review the ANS-9010, but mostly for listening to us, enthusiast users, and releasing an exciting product like this.

Amongst the thousands of terabyte 3.5" drives produced daily and 500Gb 2.5" drives sold to countless everyday-Joe's, it's not very often that companies take time to listen to what this small percentage of "Xtreme" users want, need or just would like to play with, so cheers to all the R&D guys and decision makers in Acard for this product :)


So, on to the main character of this review, the ANS-9010.
With a 5.25" form factor, 8x DDR2 DIMM slots (64Gb max capacity), SATA300 interface, embedded battery & CF backup solution, the ANS-9010 is basically promising that it can be the fastest mainstream storage device to date.
But can it keep its promises in reality?
This is what I will attempt to illustrate through the next few pages full of benchmarks and videos.

But first, some photos of the ANS-9010

The contents of the box:
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3829/contentsfa7.jpg

A photo of the ANS-9010's front panel:

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/4349/oobfrontpu2.jpg
Here you can see the Backup to CF & Restore to CF buttons, the power and battery LEDs, the CF slot, and some air input slots.

The back of the unit:
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/6769/oobbackhb7.jpg
Here you can see the SATA power connector, the 2 SATA300 connectors and a set of jumpers. The unit ships with a default "single" drive operation and virtual ECC on. The former means that all 8 DIMM slots are seen as a single drive and you can only use SATA port0, while the latter means that 1/9th of the total capacity will be used for error correction.
Dual mode was on and virtual ECC was off during the tests.

The Compact Flash slot:
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/7714/cflashev3.jpg

The battery:
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/9083/batteryjj0.jpg

Lets start installing the DIMMs:
http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/7357/ramstarthz5.jpg

All aboard:
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/1976/ramendel4.jpg

Loaded up:
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/1682/front2iz3.jpg

Connecting the battery immediately gives us the battery status:
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/5151/connectez4.jpg

Ready to roll:
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/7625/front1sy9.jpg


Installation is extremely easy: as long as you can use a screwdriver and have installed a desktop DIMM in the last 10 years, you should have all the skill needed to install the ANS-9010

The opponent
For a storage unit that claims to be the fastest mainstream product, there is no point in comparing it with mechanical 7.2k, 10k and 15k rpm disks.
I'll therefore have the ANS-9010 compete with the fastest SLC SSD available to date: the X25-E 32Gb SLC, Intel's debut in the SSD arena.
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/8454/x25etk2.png

The rest of the setup
All tests have been performed on my main PC, which comprises of the following:
CPU: E8400 running at 4500MHz
Motherboard: Asus P5Q-Deluxe (all disks on ICH10R, RAID mode)
Memory: Transcend 2x2Gb DDR2-1066
PSU: Corsair HX620
GPU: Asus 280GTX
Case: Cosmos S
OS: Vista Ultimate SP1 x64

Compatibility note
I have tested the following modules on the ANS-9010 with positive results
Kingston KVR800D2N6/4G (4Gb modules)
Kingston KVR800D2N6/2G (2Gb modules)
Gskill F2-6400CL6D-4GBMQ (2Gb modules)
OCZ OCZ2P10004GK (2Gb modules)

For the test and for my everyday usage, I am using 2 KVR800D2N6/4G modules and 1 KVR800D2N6/2G module on each side of the ANS-9010 for a total of 2 10Gb "drives" set up in a 20Gb RAID0 array on the ICH10R.

Applications used to measure and compare the performance between the ANS-9010 and the X25-E:
ATTO Disk Benchmark 2.34
CrystalDiskMark 2.2
CrystalMark 9 (2004R2)
HDTach 3.0.1
Roadkil's DskSpeed 1.0
Roadkil's DskSpeed 2.0
HDTune Pro 3.5
PCMark 2005
PCMark Vantage

In the sections to follow, you will see the screenshots from the ANS-9010 results first (left or top) and the ones from X25-E after (right or bottom, depending on your screen's resolution)

ATTO Disk Benchmark 2.34
http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/623...010attotq1.jpghttp://img520.imageshack.us/img520/4866/x25eattoca7.jpg

CrystalDiskMark 2.2
http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/720...iskmarkri2.jpghttp://img292.imageshack.us/img292/8...taldiskfg1.jpg

CrystalMark 9 (2004R2)
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/9...talmarkfd5.jpghttp://img258.imageshack.us/img258/6...talmarkqj5.jpg

HDTach 3.0.1
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/5...0hdtachtq5.jpghttp://img258.imageshack.us/img258/2...ehdtachyi5.jpg

Roadkil's DskSpeed 1.0
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/8...kspeed1gu5.jpghttp://img264.imageshack.us/img264/9...kspeed1du2.jpg

Roadkil's DskSpeed 2.0
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/7...kspeed2ib9.jpghttp://img242.imageshack.us/img242/6...kspeed2vv5.jpg

HDTune Pro 3.5 - Read speed
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/3...unereadmg9.jpghttp://img183.imageshack.us/img183/5...unereaddh1.jpg

HDTune Pro 3.5 - Write speed
http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/9...newritekw5.jpghttp://img292.imageshack.us/img292/7...newritemg7.jpg

HDTune Pro 3.5 - IOps/Access (read)
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/7...essreadae2.jpghttp://img253.imageshack.us/img253/5...essreadem4.jpg

HDTune Pro 3.5 - IOps/Access (write)
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/5...esswrituq8.jpghttp://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5...sswriteel6.jpg

HDTune Pro 3.5 - Filesystem
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/9...dtunefslo7.jpghttp://img299.imageshack.us/img299/7...dtunefswy3.jpg

PCMark 2005 - HDD suite
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/8...cmark05sb5.jpghttp://img253.imageshack.us/img253/8...cmark05nl4.jpg

PCMark Vantage - HDD suite
http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/5...vantagenn7.jpghttp://img152.imageshack.us/img152/3...vantagegk9.jpg

Some videos:

Running HDTach 3 on the ANS-9010:
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqj3OL1WTyA


Running the PCMark 2005 HDD test on the ANS-9010:
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=cCZFAUzwx7s


Editing 20 12MPixel photos (~5Mb each) with PaintShop Pro on the ANS-9010:
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=kDZsuD686Mw


*If there is a program/application that uses the HDD exensively and you want me to test it on the ANS-9010 and post a video, let me know in this thread and I will do so in my earliest convenience :)

Conclusion
Is the ANS-9010 the fastest mainstream storage drive in the world? Yes.
No matter how many times I run the benchmarks, or even by using Vista daily on it for the last few weeks, the answer is always the same.
I have a "thing" with solid state technology and I have bought, tested and used most of the SLC SSDs that have been available to the public since September 2007 (Memoright, Mtron, Sandisk, Intel, Samsung and OCZ) as well as the Gigabyte i-Ram.
The fact that it is using RAM, automatically means that it does not suffer by the issues that some (if not all) SSDs have to live with (wearing off, limited write cycles, performance hit with filesystem fragmentation, etc.)
Leaving the pagefile on, doesn't hurt it. Enabling or disabling indexing doesn't make a single difference, search results appear faster than your gfx card can render ;o
Also, fitting it with Lifetime warranty DIMMs, means that I don't have to worry about "bad sectors". DIMM fails, pull it out, restore the OS on a slightly smaller partition, replace it.


So what stops everyone from getting the fastest storage into their systems? As quickly and simply the previous answer was given: the cost.
Not the cost of the device itself, rather than the total cost for getting the ANS-9010 populated with enough DDR2 gigabytes to make it usefull as an OS drive.
I do not consider the limited capacity to be an issue, as it can be resolved by getting 4Gb modules and of course by getting as many ANS-9010 units as your PC case can fit. The common factor in all senarios ends up being the total cost.
The ANS-9010 costs $399 and the shipping costs for EU were $28. The import tax that I had to pay, was €70. The 2Gb Kingston DIMMs I bought for €17 each and the 4Gb Kingston DIMMs go for €95 each.
If you do the math quickly, someone in Europe would have to pay a total of €550 for a 16Gb ANS-9010 or €1150 for a 32Gb one.
The numbers are quite similar in the US as well ($600/16Gb or $1200/32Gb).

Some further impressions/comments, in the format of advantages and disadvantages, from my own perspective:


Advantages:
- The fastest mainstream storage you can put in your high end PC/Workstation.
- Based on RAM, means no wearing off, no need to "disable stuff" like you would do on an SSD.
- Based on the cheapest form of RAM to date (DDR2)
- Embedded, self-contained backup feature with a CF card mechanism that senses a power loss and starts backing up automatically and and a battery that lasts 9+ hours with all 8 DIMMs populated; more than enough for the CF backup unit to finish its job.
- Easy installation, fits in a 5.25" expansion bay.
- Does not require any software installation, or web-based management for configuration; true P&P.


Disadvantages:
- Total cost including RAM.
- Its form factor again, works as a disadvantage if you own a laptop or a desktop without an available 5.25".
- The fact that it takes power from the SATA power cable. If you turn off your PC at midnight, go to work the next day and come back by 5PM, the ANS-9010's battery is drained and even though the CF has kept a full backup of the data in its RAM, it still takes 15 minutes to fully restore its contents back to the RAM. Kind of eliminates the advantage of the faster booting time. A free workaround is to put the computer to standby/sleep, but it doesn't work very well on all motherboards. A not so free workaround is the optional accessory of the power adapter, that can be purchased separately.
- My only real complain is the fact that the full potential of the SATA300 protocol was not used. The SATA150-based i-Ram would use its interface's full potential (150Mb/sec - 10% overhead = 135Mb/sec). In theory, the DDR2 inside the ANS-9010 can deliver several Gb/sec, with the bottleneck becoming the SATA controller in the unit. Being a SATA300 controller, one would hope that 270Mb/sec should be feasible (SATA300's 300Mb/sec - 10% overhead), however the ANS-9010's SATA300 controller can "only" deliver 175Mb/sec. In RAID0 mode this number becomes 350Mb/sec while it could have been 540Mb/sec. That said, it's still the fastest drive out there and Acard R&D lads are on the right track :)


As previously stated, I would like to thank again Jason and Acard for giving me the opportunity to review the ANS-9010, but mostly for actually releasing such product!
It's kind of bitter when a company is ignoring the voice of their enthusiast customers for years, but on the other hand it's very rewarding when another company has the guts to step in and put the checkmarks on the wishlist :)

Thanks for reading this, I hope the nights I spent over number crunching and typing, provided a usefull or at least enjoyable result for you!

Chosen.

Awesome review, so many benchmarks there! :up:
That's a very good alternative to i-RAM considering the advantages you mentioned and low prices for DDR2-RAM today.

First class review there :clap:


I wish more companies would follow this model.

Nice review indeed! roadkil app looks interesting too :)

very nice review, and after selling my 3 irams I will be buying two of these :D

I agree with everyone, great job with the review! You clearly put some time into this review and it shows in the comprehensive benchmark results you posted along with the great conclusion. Thanks for all the time and effort you put into this, the amazing performance almost justifies the high cost!

Amazing review, thanks for that. And I agree with you, the only thing to be improved here is the SATA controller.. I was kinda expecting to see 500+ MB/s in raid, especially since the ICH10R can handle ~650MB/s throughput easily.
Cost might not be as bad as you think though, there are Aeneon-made 4GB sticks out that cost roughly 50€ a piece.

Great review , thanks for sharing. Much better than i-Rams :)

Amazing review!:up:

This thing is definitely not cheap. With only 32max per unit, might as well get a intel SSD. SSD capacity will grow a lot faster than RAM. I specualate SSD being more mainstream and affordable as win 7 hits the shelf. This RAM drive is a great alternative for SSD but hate to say it, it won't last more than a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exe163

This RAM drive is a great alternative for SSD but hate to say it, it won't last more than a year.

---

Huh? I think you have this the wrong way around. :shakes:

It's the SSD that has a limited lifespan (max writes per cell) while a DRAM-based device will keep on ticking, year after year, OS after OS. It's an investment that does NOT have a limited lifespan, like an SSD.

I believe he means SSD performance is closing in on this and the Iram, not referring to durability

Nice review Chosen.

You should do more reviews! :)

Would love to see an optimized version that could make better use of the DRAM performance potential (maybe interface or controller improvements)

Unfortunately, given the global economic situation, the market for this or future similar products is probably very small

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedMoMegaHurtZ

Nice review Chosen.

You should do more reviews! :)

Would love to see an optimized version that could make better use of the DRAM performance potential (maybe interface or controller improvements)

Unfortunately, given the global economic situation, the market for this or future similar products is probably very small

---

Yes, SATA seems to be the bottleneck now. It was ok for the 7.2k and 10k rpm drives, but with devices like the Acard ramdrives etc. it's starting to show its weeknesses.
Ideally, I can imagine a 5.25" drive using RAM, much like the ANS-9010, but instead of SATA interface to have a fiber optic cable of something else with a high throughput, connecting it to a host card on a PCI-E 16x slot, taking full advantage of the PCI bandwidth.
But I mentioned technologies in the above sentence that would raise the cost 5x compared to the ANS-9010 just by introducing R&D for them.

So for the time being, I am more than happy with my ANS-9010, and needless to say that I sold the X25-E of the review, a little less than a month since I bought it.

Next plan is to get another ANS-9010 for some emotional quad RAID0 action.
The way I see it, it costs the same buying 2x ANS-9010 and filling them up with 2Gb modules, than buying just 1 and using 4Gb modules. The only difference is that the former scenario (2x ANS-9010) offers double the performance :D

@ Chosen

Nice review! :up:

How much are these modules? (Kingston KVR800D2N6/4G (4Gb modules))

*looks at iRAM* :(

Nice review!
Also nice product, but it is very overpriced. IMO it should be no more than $150(150 eur in Europe). If it was priced like that, I was going to buy one for sure. I can buy 2GB DDR2-800 Micron OEM modules for 14eur(inc VAT) and 16GB are enough to instal 2 OS-es and most of the frequently used apps.

Excellent review. Would there be performance increase in using CL4 DDR2 800 sticks rather then CL5 or 6?
But then again, are there any 4GB sticks with such low latencies?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMpiR

Excellent review. Would there be performance increase in using CL4 DDR2 800 sticks rather then CL5 or 6?
But then again, are there any 4GB sticks with such low latencies?

---

performance is not limited by the memory sticks, ddr2 bandwidth is likely over 4000MB/sec, if this was a SATA6Gbps device it'd still be limited by SATA6Gbps or its own controller and misc latencies

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.

@ Chosen

Nice review! :up:

How much are these modules? (Kingston KVR800D2N6/4G (4Gb modules))

---

About £80/ea from UK.

With respect to memory chips:

2nd thought each individal bank of ram would probably have in the neighborhood of 2000-2500MB/sec in RAID0 mode, however still its around 15Gb/sec and per bank it would still be limited by the bus and misc latencies and would have about 2.5-3 times the bandwidth of the upcoming SATA6Gbp/sec if you factor in overhead.

Reviews seem to be popping up all over; but has anyone know how a couple of these these perform with hardware raid cards (e.g. adaptec, areca, highpoint etc...) vs. ICHR9/10

If you end up picking up that 2nd unit, I would love for you to update the testing results, chosen. :)

Also, have you heard any rumors of a revision (what improvements and ETA)? Jason from Acard was hinting, but nothing concrete ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chosen.

About £80/ea from UK.

---

You are a greek? ;)
Where do you bought your X25-E? In germany the SSD is out of stock (384€ or US-$ 501) :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.

You are a greek? ;)
Where do you bought your X25-E? In germany the SSD is out of stock (384€ or US-$ 501) :rolleyes:

---

Yes, I am a Greek living in Ireland. I bought my X25-E from UK for £495 about a month ago but it's out of stock now.
A greek shop brought the X25's in stock now, €400 for the MLC and €430 for the SLC (the SLC went out of stock 24 hours after they put that price) :shocked:

the x-25e is starting to show in the US well here and there for 416$ is the lowest i've seen and 384 for the x-25m

@ Levish

416$ with VAT?
I heard all US-Shop sell their products without VAT!?!?!?

Very good review, awesome job.

It seems that the tech is still very limited, it is more worth it to just to buy a SSD as they cost pretty much the same and maybe cheaper and you get more space, am thinking of the Intel 160 GB version here, which is about 600 quid, roughly the same price as this or abouts.

The insane loading time for the CF to backup the RAM sticks, really puts me off, was thinking of using this as a OS drive, but 15 minutes is too much. :p

You mean people got their samples? Mine never turned up. :down:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronWarrior

The insane loading time for the CF to backup the RAM sticks, really puts me off, was thinking of using this as a OS drive, but 15 minutes is too much. :p

---

You need a power supply, when PC shut down. Then the OS loads from the modules an not from CF ;)

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=242 :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.

@ Levish

416$ with VAT?
I heard all US-Shop sell their products without VAT!?!?!?

---

i don't remember exactly but in the US its possible to get things with no tax and free shipping :D

Here's something interesting: there seems to be a performance drop going from the ICH10 of the P45 (Asus P5Q-Deluxe) to the ICH10 of the X58 (Asus P6T).

Asus P5Q Deluxe (P45/ICH10) - The one used in the review:
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/5...0hdtachtq5.jpg

Asus P6T (X58/IXH10) - My new motherboard:
http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/763...8ich10rqx1.png

Besides the different CPU (i7 965 XE), the motherboard (Asus P6T) and the system memory (Crucial 3x1Gb 1333MHz) there is no other difference in the setups. Fresh installation of the same OS (Vista Ultimate SP1 x64), same RAID driver (8.7.0.1007) and same IMSM (8.7).

It's pretty obvious that Intel dropped the ball here, as I put the ANS-9010 back on the P45 board for a quick test and got the same results as before (375Mb/sec read & 300Mb/sec write).

So the question is: what did Intel change on the ICH10 of the new motherboards and is there a workaround to get this performance back?
I will keep investigating and post back my findings.
In the meantime, if anyone has anything to add/suggest, feel free to post here :)

Dumb question: Did you try switching ports on the P6T?

Is the trend the same with HDTune?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedMoMegaHurtZ

Dumb question: Did you try switching ports on the P6T?

Is the trend the same with HDTune?

---

Yes, I just moved them from ports 0-1 to 0-2 (different pair), removed the DVDRW and moved the OS disk on the Jmicron controller. They're all alone now on the ICH10 and it's as bad:

P45/ICH10:
http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/720...iskmarkri2.jpg

X58/ICH10:
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/3097/sataports02mb9.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.

@ Levish

416$ with VAT?
I heard all US-Shop sell their products without VAT!?!?!?

---

No VAT in US... different tax system.
They bleed them less obviously so it doesn't cause a riot! :D

Back on topic: Those 2 Acard results you just posted are exactly what I like to see! ~650MB/s !!!
Capped by ICH10, no?

Did you guys see the little brother? It's only $250USD instead of the $400 of the big brother. All you lose is 25% of RAM capacity and the ability raid the two channels.

9010B Link

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chosen.

It's pretty obvious that Intel dropped the ball here, as I put the ANS-9010 back on the P45 board for a quick test and got the same results as before (375Mb/sec read & 300Mb/sec write).

So the question is: what did Intel change on the ICH10 of the new motherboards and is there a workaround to get this performance back?
I will keep investigating and post back my findings.
In the meantime, if anyone has anything to add/suggest, feel free to post here :)

---

An ICH10 is an ICH10. They should be identical in benchmarks. So the person that dropped the ball isn't Intel at all. I'd point to your motherboard manufacturer. Call Asus and ask them why their stuff isn't working right. This could be some sort of driver issue with the new motherboard, but whatever the result is, I don't think it's Intel. It's the same hardware and same driver you used on both motherboards. I posted in another thread some of the bottlenecks motherboards have. If your ICH10 is connected via a 1x pcie connection, then yeah.. your benchmarks are what they are and they're not going to change either. That would be called poor design and implementation. Find the block diagram for your motherboard, that'll tell you if this is the case.

There's a reason I've been buying Asus since around 2000 - probably bought 15 or more motherboards from them over the years. But not this year. This year I've made the switch to Gigabit. I have no regrets whatsoever either. In fact, I've already got 2 more motherboards for other people on order, both are Gigabit. To each their own though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levish

With respect to memory chips:

2nd thought each individal bank of ram would probably have in the neighborhood of 2000-2500MB/sec in RAID0 mode, however still its around 15Gb/sec and per bank it would still be limited by the bus and misc latencies and would have about 2.5-3 times the bandwidth of the upcoming SATA6Gbp/sec if you factor in overhead.

---

They aren't in a RAID0. This is obvious by the fact that you can put any size in any slot in any random order you want and the box works. This is actually a plus for the end user because we aren't forced to buy all identically sized ram sticks. You can use 2x512MB, 2x2GB, and 4x4GB if you wanted(and in any order). So yes, you are right. But no, that's not how it's set up. Kudos for the concept though.

very nice review , I am a tad late :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levish

I believe he means SSD performance is closing in on this and the Iram, not referring to durability

---

The SSD isn't even close to the speed of ram, the only reason it looks close here is because the sata interface is limiting the speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cold Fussion

The SSD isn't even close to the speed of ram, the only reason it looks close here is because the sata interface is limiting the speed.

---

it is anyway faster than any flash-ssd (4k and smaller). THAT is the reason for iRam or Acard ;)

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=242


And why ist a high bandwidth NOT important?
Cause a OS ist NOT dependent of that ;)
The magic word is accesstime!

You don´t see iRam or Acard in action? Don´t talk bad of them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.

it is anyway faster than any flash-ssd (4k and smaller). THAT is the reason for iRam or Acard ;)

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=242


And why ist a high bandwidth NOT important?
Cause a OS ist NOT dependent of that ;)
The magic word is accesstime!

You don´t see iRam or Acard in action? Don´t talk bad of them!

---

I'm sorry but what the hell are you on about? I just :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing praised Ram drives...

:p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cold Fussion

The SSD isn't even close to the speed of ram, the only reason it looks close here is because the sata interface is limiting the speed.

---

It's not SATA but controller.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cold Fussion

The SSD isn't even close to the speed of ram, the only reason it looks close here is because the sata interface is limiting the speed.

---

I wasn't implying that, a X25-M or X25-E is a very comparable product and has similar access times to this device and furthermore they are in the same rough price category (400-1000$ including ram), this is all I meant.

DDR2 ram is clearly far out ahead of any current flash storage device even in single channel mode in all possible respects other than cost.

Chosen., if it's not difficult could you test the Acard in Single mode in order to see the efficiency of a per slot utilization. It's obviuos that a RAID0 would rule a single drive of similar performance (dual mode Acard vs Intel SSD I mean). But what about one by one?

Also I would like to see the card in SATA150 mode to see it's scalability (SATA150-SATA300-Dual SATA300-Quad? SATA300), so that thoughts can be done.
A HDtach test (HDtune shows roughly the same), one of the access time tests (to see the comparision, not exact numbers which can vary depending on the platform) and both PCMarks would be more than enough for me :)

Found another test of it http://www.wideopenwest.com/~dcason6634/Acard.html
and on Techreport: http://techreport.com/articles.x/16255 but their testing is a bit one-side.

Only just noticed this review:eek:

But whoa, awesome thing. Expensive though but well, what about two of those things in RAID-0 (with a good RAID controller like mine or better, not some onboard thing).

How long does this battery keep the DIMMs powered? Although the back-up mode is awesome, pushing that thing every 5 minutes ain't awesome either:p:

A test with 1x and 2x Acard by a german user...
Sorry, it´s german, but the pics are multilanguage :D

http://www.hyperossystems.de/Erfahru...perdrive_5.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chosen.

So the question is: what did Intel change on the ICH10 of the new motherboards and is there a workaround to get this performance back?
I will keep investigating and post back my findings.
In the meantime, if anyone has anything to add/suggest, feel free to post here :)

---

you've tried disabling the power save options in the bios ?

EIST, C1E, TM2, C. States

especially the option C. States

i havent understand how much memory and which memory ddr2 you used ...

2x2gb 800mhz and 2x4gb ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aerie

i havent understand how much memory and which memory ddr2 you used ...

2x2gb 800mhz and 2x4gb ?

---

Quote:

---

For the test and for my everyday usage, I am using 2 KVR800D2N6/4G modules and 1 KVR800D2N6/2G module on each side of the ANS-9010 for a total of 2 10Gb "drives" set up in a 20Gb RAID0 array on the ICH10R.

---

The ANS-9010 was set to "Dual mode" which means that each side acts like a single drive. As I stated on my original post, each "side" has 2x4Gb and 1x2Gb DIMMs, total inside the ANS-9010: 4x4Gb + 2x2Gb = 20Gb
:)

i can put 8x2gb kingstone rught ? i have 16gb :) 4gb are too expensive :(

Yepp, 8x 2GB

I´m still waiting for my 2 Acard 9010 (maybe this week) :D

16x Kingston (KVR800D2N6/2G)
http://www.abload.de/thumb/pict05688k9i.jpg


Please buy one of these modules...

http://dl.acard.com/download/compiti...ble%20list.pdf

yep the same i have bought!! but only one 9010 for me :)

It appears that the guys at Acard are testing new modules continuously, because every time I check out the compatibility list it contains a few more DIMM model numbers. Good stuff :)

Recieved mine a couple of days ago :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by massman

Recieved mine a couple of days ago :)

---

How is it compared to I-ram?

I would prefer I-ram for my purpose despite the problems.

Haven't finished all the tests, but first results tell me the Acard is a tad faster than 3x-iRam (in PCMark). The Acard is imho easier to use as you don't need any PCI lanes and you can have a Raid 0 configuration without having to buy two. In addition, there's a direct backup function available and it's possible to have a larger harddisk (upto 64GB iirc).


It's quite expensive, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chosen.

It appears that the guys at Acard are testing new modules continuously, because every time I check out the compatibility list it contains a few more DIMM model numbers. Good stuff :)

---

You can use whatever DDR2 you want. Mine is filled with 4 different dual channel kits and works perfectly.

someone can explain me how it works sw3 button ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antinomy

How is it compared to I-ram?

I would prefer I-ram for my purpose despite the problems.

---

I-Ram with a ARC-1261D-ML

http://www.abload.de/img/hc_5307gbq.jpg

Any stability issues with the ACARD? I'm thinking of getting one for my OS drive too.

check massmans review on madshrimps, very nice read :toast:
acard costs more but once you take mem prices into account its cheaper than iram, and faster.
at sizes above 16gb acard plus mem costs half as much as a comparable iram plus mem combo

id get one if i wouldnt be hooked on laptops atm...

Loading of 25 apps in 8 seconds. Sorry for the bad quality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxH0iv_dYJ4

Screen of the end

http://www.abload.de/thumb/hc_668w5p3.jpg


Better quality, but more than 8 seconds with camtasia (screen-capture-program) :(

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GJ5r99f8Es

can someone bench the way it runs when configured as a single drive

i'm going to have to get one of these, but i'm not sure whether to get the 9010 or 9010b - if the 9010 can literally perform like 2x9010b i'll get the 9010, but if there's a bottleneck in the onboard processor that makes it scale more like multi-gpu i'll just get a 9010b now and a 2nd one later, the extra slots definitely won't hurt.

cos in theory a ramdrive should be able to perfectly max out a SATA link, but it's giving less than 190mb/s per SATA channel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F.E.A.R.

Loading of 25 apps in 8 seconds. Sorry for the bad quality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxH0iv_dYJ4

Screen of the end

http://www.abload.de/thumb/hc_668w5p3.jpg


Better quality, but more than 8 seconds with camtasia (screen-capture-program) :(

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GJ5r99f8Es

---

8 secs? Holy cow, that's fast! How long did it take for you to boot up Vista?

I don´t know exactly.
The Areca eat some seconds for initialization.
It´s a 24/7-PC...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antinomy

if it's not difficult could you test the Acard in Single mode in order to see the efficiency of a per slot utilization. It's obviuos that a RAID0 would rule a single drive of similar performance (dual mode Acard vs Intel SSD I mean). But what about one by one?

Also I would like to see the card in SATA150 mode to see it's scalability (SATA150-SATA300-Dual SATA300-Quad? SATA300), so that thoughts can be done.
Found another test of it http://www.wideopenwest.com/~dcason6634/Acard.html
and on Techreport: http://techreport.com/articles.x/16255 but their testing is a bit one-side.

---

I put together some benchmarks on my review:
http://2xod.com/articles/ANS_9010_ramdisk_review/

Also, I have been playing with some charting stuff. I've compiled the data from around 800 hours of benchmarking my RAID and the Acard Ramdisk to create a customizable charting interface:
http://2xod.com/articles/charts/

Here you can customize the chart to show the difference between 1.5 and 3.0 SATA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carlof2XOD

I put together some benchmarks on my review:
http://2xod.com/articles/ANS_9010_ramdisk_review/

Also, I have been playing with some charting stuff. I've compiled the data from around 800 hours of benchmarking my RAID and the Acard Ramdisk to create a customizable charting interface:
http://2xod.com/articles/charts/

Here you can customize the chart to show the difference between 1.5 and 3.0 SATA.

---

Thanks for the review, any particular reason you choose ECC ram over non-ECC?

It was the same price! On Newegg it was exactly the same price!

For a while the market was saturated with 2GB modules and they were all dirt cheap. That's actually the reason I bought the ramdisk at all.

When using ECC you get more space out of the ramdisk because it allocates space to do ECC emulation. This may also cost a tad in perormance. One way or another the unit is doing ECC.

@ Jor3lBR

Wenn you use 16GB-ECC-Ram a 16GB-CF-Card is to small.
Because 16GB-Ram are 16 GiB, but a 16GB-CF only 16 GB

I´m using Non-ECC-Rams from Kingston with ECC-Simulation.
ECC-Sim. eats ~ 1/6 of Ram.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jor3lBR

Thanks for the review, any particular reason you choose ECC ram over non-ECC?

---

I have been testing that unit for couple of days for now and I think, useing ECC ram instead of non-ECC is the main reason why his tests are the highest ones.
Disableing indexing service took CrystalD....seg reading down to 320MB/s (from 343MB/s) but helped a lot in 4k write speads (from 44MB/s to 82MB/s)

My tests are pretty good (looking reviews) but there is no way I'm gonna beat Chosen ones. Good one :up: But I have couple of more ideas :rolleyes: