wow steve tons of results there GREAT job man! gonna take awhile to digest all of the numbers, however the game load times is where i want to start....
9620-8i price is roughly 500 bucks. the 1231 is $769 for 2GB and $1050 for 4GB.
in the load times the 1231 outperforms the 9260-8i in game loads slightly, less than a second, and also being last gen and pretty much maxed in firmware and software, i think it is a no-brainer that among the cards the 9260-8i is the best , especially considering it's forward mobility. i believe if you ran that at a 64k stripe or even 16k stripe the 9260-8i would beat the 1231 pretty easily, i have made tremendous gains with those stripe sizes, i am running some different tests for the 9260 at different stripe sizes and will give you numbers in the difference in load times shortly, before the end of the weekend. one of the largest differences is going to be the 16k stripe as it is at the other end of the spectrum from the 1mb of course. i do have numbers for that. basically about .5 sec faster with the 16k than the 1mb. doesnt sound like much but of course when load times are around 3 seconds on consecutive loads a .5 is a big deal.
the 9211's poor showing in game load times did not suprise me much, even though i would hardly call that performance 'poor'. hell for 230 bucks you literally cannot beat it. and considering that it is a virgin firmware AND driver jesus there is only one way to go...up.
the ICH10r is impressive, however i think the 92xx series will surpass it soon with future improvements,. and thats not even begging to mention sata 3 and sas2 devices. they will positively torch the ich10r. i am not surprised that the ich10r does better than the 1231. the 1231 was designed how many years ago? the ich10r is a more developed solution imo. hell it was designed when SSD's were actually on the market. im not sure when the 1231 was designed in 06 and released in 07. not sure.
that does bring into the equation that your results are using acards and not ssd....
one conclusion i can draw from the 9211 results for sure is that considering the 9260's 'poor' 4k random and the 9211's superb 4k random, the 9260-8i beating the 9211 could help prove that the 4k random is not as big of a determining factor as many think, especially in light of the fact that there have been other sources pointing to it as relevant, but not nearly the end-all performance indicator. people read far far too much into 4k.
(i have obtained warhead, last night off of steam, i am going to run it on the different controllers to compare to your load times with acards...i bet you smoke me)
thansk for your hard work and effort man.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks