Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Intel Rapid Storage Technology (RST) version 9.6.0.1014 released

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    63

    Intel Rapid Storage Technology (RST) version 9.6.0.1014 released

    RAID: Intel Rapid Storage Technology Driver for Intel Desktop Boards

    Installs the Intel Rapid Storage Technology (RAID) driver version 9.6.0.1014 for Intel Desktop Boards.

    http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Sear...p+Board+DX58SO

    http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Deta...15251&lang=eng

  2. #2
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    Those links don't seem to work but this one does: http://downloadmirror.intel.com/1525....0.1014_PV.exe

    Edit: no speed increase on an AS SSD Benchmark run.
    Last edited by Ao1; 03-20-2010 at 02:05 AM.

  3. #3
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by audienceofone View Post
    Those links don't seem to work but this one does: http://downloadmirror.intel.com/1525....0.1014_PV.exe
    Awefull drivers, stear clear by a mile, not even TRIM in Raid0 would get me to use these...... They loose 100mb/s sequential read, same on random QD#32, gain some in a few areas, but the good does not weigh up for the bad.. Single drive users might not notice any difference, but raid0 sertainly will...
    | Ci7 2600k@4.6ghz | Asus SaberTooth P67 | Sapphire HD7970 | Samsung B555 32" | Samsung 840 PRO 128gb + 2xIntel SSD 520 120GB Raid0 + 2xC300 64GB Raid0 | Corsair Vengeance 16GB DDR3-1600 8-8-8-24 | Vantage GPU=40250 |

  4. #4
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    Agreed. Highly disappointing that Intel can't optimise performance over an MS driver. Comparative score below.

    AS SSD Benchmark 1.4.3645.3568
    ------------------------------
    Name: INTEL SSDSA2M160G2GC
    Firmware: 2CV1
    Controller: iaStor
    Offset: 103424 K - OK
    Size: 149.05 GB
    Date: 20/03/2010 09:12:32
    ------------------------------
    Sequential:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 249.51 MB/s (WAS 255.64)
    Write: 104.98 MB/s (WAS 105.06)
    ------------------------------
    4K:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 21.29 MB/s (WAS 21.69)
    Write: 44.96 MB/s (WAS 52.24)
    ------------------------------
    4K-64Threads:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 146.40 MB/s (WAS 158.81)
    Write: 64.09 MB/s (WAS 65.58)
    ------------------------------
    Access Times:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 0.082 ms (WAS 0.057)
    Write: 0.096 ms (WAS 0.084)
    ------------------------------
    Score:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 193 (WAS 206)
    Write: 120 (WAS 128)
    Total: 412 (WAS 441)
    ------------------------------

  5. #5
    Xtreme Monster Metroid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,072
    Sad to hear about it. I suppose is Intel's first attempt. Let's wait for the v2.

  6. #6
    Moderator Anvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    2,838
    @audienceofone,

    When did you bench that 441 score?
    Was it right before installing the 9.6 package or some time ago?

    (I'm just thinking it could be caused by degrading perfomance on your G2)

    I noticed firmware 2CV1?
    -
    Hardware:

  7. #7
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    Looks like AS SSD Bench can't pick up the full f/w version with the RST driver. I'm running 2CV102HD. I don't think degradation is a problem as the score does not change after a manual trim, but I will switch back to the MS driver and do a fresh AS bench run just to check.

  8. #8
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    Results after a switch back to MS drivers.


    AS SSD Benchmark 1.4.3645.3568
    ------------------------------
    Name: INTEL SSDSA2M160G2GC ATA Device
    Firmware: 2CV102HD
    Controller: msahci
    Offset: 103424 K - OK
    Size: 149.05 GB
    Date: 20/03/2010 11:10:23
    ------------------------------
    Sequential:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 247.17 MB/s
    Write: 104.36 MB/s
    ------------------------------
    4K:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 20.23 MB/s
    Write: 44.28 MB/s
    ------------------------------
    4K-64Threads:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 153.03 MB/s
    Write: 64.94 MB/s
    ------------------------------
    Access Times:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 0.085 ms
    Write: 0.102 ms
    ------------------------------
    Score:
    ------------------------------
    Read: 198
    Write: 120
    Total: 420
    ------------------------------

  9. #9
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    193
    Do a QD#32 CDM test, see if its anywhere near what I loose in raid0, loss from 270mb/s to 182mb/s is somewhat tragic imho.... Only ~50mb/s on QD#64 though..
    | Ci7 2600k@4.6ghz | Asus SaberTooth P67 | Sapphire HD7970 | Samsung B555 32" | Samsung 840 PRO 128gb + 2xIntel SSD 520 120GB Raid0 + 2xC300 64GB Raid0 | Corsair Vengeance 16GB DDR3-1600 8-8-8-24 | Vantage GPU=40250 |

  10. #10
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CrystalDiskMark 3.0 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
    Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    RST 9.6.0.1014
    Sequential Read : 255.792 MB/s
    Sequential Write : 109.595 MB/s
    Random Read 512KB : 188.210 MB/s
    Random Write 512KB : 110.796 MB/s
    Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 23.297 MB/s [ 5687.7 IOPS]
    Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 66.615 MB/s [ 16263.5 IOPS]
    Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 154.345 MB/s [ 37681.8 IOPS]
    Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 98.916 MB/s [ 24149.4 IOPS]

    Test : 50 MB [C: 31.5% (37.7/119.7 GB)] (x5)
    Date : 2010/03/20 13:41:13
    OS : Windows 7 Home Premium Edition [6.1 Build 7600] (x64)

  11. #11
    Uber Raid King Computurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wichita, Ks
    Posts
    3,887
    it sounds like this version allows trim via raid? or am i misunderstanding?
    "Lurking" Since 1977


    Jesus Saves, God Backs-Up
    *I come to the news section to ban people, not read complaints.*-[XC]Gomeler
    Don't believe Squish, his hardware does control him!

  12. #12
    Xtreme Cruncher Musho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by Computurd View Post
    it sounds like this version allows trim via raid? or am i misunderstanding?
    That would be awesome! Wondering the same thing. Let's hope if it support trim, that they'll come out with a new version soon enough, to bring the performance numbers back to where they were.

  13. #13
    Xtreme Cruncher Musho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    895
    Look what we have here:


  14. #14
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    ^ where did you get that little gem from?

  15. #15
    Xtreme Cruncher Musho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by audienceofone View Post
    ^ where did you get that little gem from?
    I haven't downloaded the driver yet myself. Intel's site seems to be down. But on OCZ forums they are discussing the drivers, and it seems that description show on the screenshot can be found inside the driver's GUI.

    Here's the link to the OCZ thread: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/fo...t-coming/page2

  16. #16
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    Wow that was sneaky, but its defiantly there in the help documentation.

  17. #17
    Xtreme Cruncher Musho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by audienceofone View Post
    Wow that was sneaky, but its defiantly there in the help documentation.
    Do you think this is news worthy? Would it be a good idea to post it in the news section? I don't think the news section may be used for new drivers, right? A lot of people might miss this news, though, while it's quite big IMO

  18. #18
    Xtreme Supporter D749's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    654
    My two 80GB G2s are sitting on a shelf until TRIM can be passed to a RAID0 array. I hope this is for real. If it is it's news worthy!
    Last edited by D749; 03-20-2010 at 02:30 PM.

  19. #19
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    If it’s true it’s a bit more that a just a driver update. It changes things quite a bit. There is still no way of knowing if trim is working or not (other than benchmark). It would be nice to see if the Intel Toolbox recognised a raid array and let you manually trim.

  20. #20
    Xtreme Cruncher Musho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by audienceofone View Post
    If it’s true it’s a bit more that a just a driver update. It changes things quite a bit. There is still no way of knowing if trim is working or not (other than benchmark). It would be nice to see if the Intel Toolbox recognised a raid array and let you manually trim.
    Intel's site is back online. Currently compressing some data, so I can't install the drivers yet, but as soon as that is done, I'll see if Intel's SSD Tool can manually TRIM the raid array now. I wouldn't hold my breath, though. As far as I know, SATA TRIM and manual TRIM are two different things, so these drivers allowing SATA TRIM, doesn't necessarily mean the manual TRIM will work too.
    Last edited by Musho; 03-20-2010 at 02:31 PM.

  21. #21
    Xtreme Mentor Ao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,597
    Maybe not but if it did it would confirm 100%

  22. #22
    Uber Raid King Computurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wichita, Ks
    Posts
    3,887
    wow this is an exciting day if it holds true! i wonder how long before we start to see firmwares from the raidcard companies? guess this will end the endless argument of picking either trim or raid. i swear i see twenty posts a week on various forums with that same question.
    ich10r doesnt do raid 6 right? if it does wonder why they can get it to pass in 6 but not 5?
    "Lurking" Since 1977


    Jesus Saves, God Backs-Up
    *I come to the news section to ban people, not read complaints.*-[XC]Gomeler
    Don't believe Squish, his hardware does control him!

  23. #23
    Xtreme Cruncher Musho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by Computurd View Post
    wow this is an exciting day if it holds true! i wonder how long before we start to see firmwares from the raidcard companies? guess this will end the endless argument of picking either trim or raid. i swear i see twenty posts a week on various forums with that same question.
    ich10r doesnt do raid 6 right? if it does wonder why they can get it to pass in 6 but not 5?
    ICH10R doesn't support raid6 AFAIK

  24. #24
    Uber Raid King Computurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wichita, Ks
    Posts
    3,887
    well now if the driver passes trim its on to nuts and bolts. how is this going to affect performance? there has been some slowdown seen when ssd were initially upgraded to trim functionality, is this extra layer of i/o transactions going to effect the iop performance of the controllers? and if so, how badly? then we can have people still wondering if trim is worth it in raid !

    serious though from what ive read above, there seems to be a performance impact in certain cases...will be interesting to see how this pans out.
    "Lurking" Since 1977


    Jesus Saves, God Backs-Up
    *I come to the news section to ban people, not read complaints.*-[XC]Gomeler
    Don't believe Squish, his hardware does control him!

  25. #25
    Xtreme Cruncher Musho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    895
    Intel's Toolbox still says "Raid is not supported"

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •