Meausuring QD in win7

[One_Hertz]

A few points to consider:

I have never seen a game use more than 200MB/s in raw read bandwidth using a few different tracers, even though my setup can do 800+

FusionIO shows similar performance to one X25-M in respect to loading games, while being loads faster in benchmarks (lowfat)

The new SF-1500 controllers, which are faster than X25-M in benchmarks, show identical performance to X25-M in game loading (anandtech)

X25-E, which is a lot faster than X25-M in a lot of benchmarks, shows identical loadings times to X25-M (anand).

Raid-0 does not improve game loading times (independent testing from loads of people on this forum)

Acard is noticeably faster at loading games than all current SSDs due to its lower access times. (any review)

Different RAID controllers (between the good ones anyway) hardly have any impact on game loading times (SteveRO)

New gen SSDs can not improve low queue performance until the Flash memory itself gets faster in terms of access times. They can keep making controllers better, but access times will still be limiting things.

If you look at the big picture, all current top end SSD setups are pretty close to one another in terms of loading times. I don't see this changing until either game coders optimize their games for SSDs or access times are decreased.

[Levish]

A few points to consider:

I have never seen a game use more than 200MB/sec in raw read bandwidth using a few different tracers, even though my setup can do 800+

Your system might do 800MB/sec+ at a 128k+ file size but at the 4k file size (for example) you'd be lucky to see 20MB/sec at 1QD

Such is the way RAID works (I'm assuming you are talking about a RAID0 array with the typical 64k or 128k stripe), with respect to being limited to single drive performance at that file level

Then! That single drive is further limited by flash speed, controller, number of channels used, firmware and who knows what more. Which is why you don't see the x25-m doing 200MB/sec at the 4k size (or any other SSD).

Controller improvements and Flash development/improvements can very much bump that rate up significantly and this is where you will see the improvements in loading times!

Or just use a ram disk if you've got that kind of money @_@
I'm not even sure what the latency is on it but most DDR2/3 systems nowadays should be able to do more than 4000MB/sec although then you could run into CPU limitations (with any cpu).

with respect to acard
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...1&limitstart=6

shows its 4k random reads going to ~65MB/sec which is 3x the speed of the intel x25-m
So its almost 3x faster than a single x25-m at that file size and alot of games have many files at or near that size.
But they also cap out much sooner and lower at the larger file sizes.

Of course we get back to the original comment, since you are investing that much into ram to begin with, you should have just setup a ram disk and enjoyed much higher performance to begin with.