|
|||||||
| Benching Discuss & compare your system and video card performance with others. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Sep 12, 2006, 03:13 PM
|
#1 |
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0  |
Hard drive read speeds
OK if I run the SiSoft Sandra 2007 test for read speeds on the rig in my signature... I'm pushing 125-130MB/sec... is this considered normal or average? The two of them are in RAID-0 with a 32K stripe size and I ran it without anything else going (defrag etc).
Reason I ask is that the read speed at the end of the disk is faster than the read speed of a single disk at the beginning of its platter by as much as 10MB/sec! So that's good right?  I'm new to RAID so I have to ask
|
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2006, 08:49 AM
|
#2 |
|
DriverHeaven Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 0 |
the hard drive tests arnt very accurate u will have the best scors with a 10k rpm drive and 2 cluster size, but in real life the drives r qued befor the read in most cases and wait for avalable ram, and in long burst tests the ;arger 32kb and 64kb clusters will provail
so the tests r missleading u might be doing good or very bad other things are if u recently defaged 0 wiped or had something spining the hd then ran the test it could score beter than it could acctuly do i also dont know what raid controler u r useing but some r much faster than others |
|
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2006, 09:22 AM
|
#3 |
|
Lurking DriverHeaven
|
you might also want to try HD-Tach as an alternative benchmark proggie to see if the scores between the two programs are similar or not.
I did a benchmark of my raptor and my two raided seagates not too long ago....i'll try and dig up that thread again and post the link. i do know that the seagates were faster in data transfer, but my raptor had a faster access time. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 14, 2006, 03:14 PM
|
Thread Starter
#4
|
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
How are the tests THAT misleading I mean the system is definately faster than before... I'm not sure what you mean by 'spining the hd', nothing was running in the way of extra apps or anything. And how is a 0 wipe gonna make things go faster...... it won't.....  I did a Peter Gutmann wipe on my drive and it was no faster/slower than before I did it.@Cd's: Thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 16, 2006, 02:11 AM
|
#5 |
|
DriverHeaven Newbie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 0 |
the via raid controllers r slow so u might want to try a differnt one if ur mb has it or buy a promise card if u realy want some speed
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 16, 2006, 02:48 AM
|
#6 |
|
Lurking DriverHeaven
|
here's my thread on my RAID 0 drivers vs. my 36gb raptor.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 18, 2006, 04:46 PM
|
Thread Starter
#7
|
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
I'm stuck with this RAID controller and I'm not buying a PCI controller because I can guarantee that will be slower especially since 125MB would nearly saturate the PCI bus as it is, then tack on my sound card and other stuff....stuff'd go wrong. Thanks for the suggestion though |
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 18, 2006, 07:47 PM
|
#8 | |
|
Obvious Closet Brony Pony
|
raid is enourmousely faster when it comes to massive file movements, or realtime rightspeeds.
I would never been able to capture raw video at anything decent in quality (resolution) or frames per second if i didn't have raid.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2006, 08:11 PM
|
Thread Starter
#9
|
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
 @CDs Thanks for the link, I feel pretty good about how well my array is doing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2006, 11:27 PM
|
#10 |
|
Lurking DriverHeaven
|
lol....ya, and mind you that my RAID 0 array has like 6Gb of free space of it's total 160
 . and neither of the two drives were defragmented at the time i tested them. so, i think both drives could still have done better.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006, 03:02 PM
|
Thread Starter
#11
|
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006, 06:26 PM
|
#12 |
|
Lurking DriverHeaven
|
well a while ago, i found out that you need to have a minimum of 15% of hard drive space free in order to perform a defrag. now 6Gb of 160 is actually 3%
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006, 08:18 PM
|
#13 | |
|
Obvious Closet Brony Pony
|
actually 15% free for defrag to really run at all, and at least 25% to actually defrag at a reasonable speed. (15% vs 25% room while defragging can mean hours differences)
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006, 08:58 PM
|
#14 |
|
Lurking DriverHeaven
|
i can't wait until i get that 250Gb drive. imna move all my ish onto it, and install nothing but games on my RAID 0 array
. and i'll be able to defrag all 3 drive letters . that hasn't been done in forever
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006, 09:34 PM
|
#15 | |
|
Obvious Closet Brony Pony
|
CDs,
Initially i ran a 2x raid 0 array with a 3rd or even 2x the 2x raid 0 array, only to find out that trying 3 or 4 drives all in raid 0 (yes you can have 3 drives in raid 0) was faster.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006, 10:00 PM
|
#16 |
|
Lurking DriverHeaven
|
my IC7-G has four SATA controllers. two of them i know for a fact are for RAID. the other two, i've heard that they can be used as either single controller or as RAID controllers. so i dunno if i could run a 4 disk RAID array. besides, i don't think i'd be able to because aside from my two 80Gb seagates, none of the other drives are the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006, 10:46 PM
|
#17 | |
|
Obvious Closet Brony Pony
|
they don't have to be the same to run in raid, you can just about hook up any setup of drives in different speeds/sizes/brands whatever. But if you run 2 seperate controllers, no your limited to using one controller or the other, not both in tandem.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2006, 03:56 AM
|
#18 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,989
Rep Power: 71 |
if your motherboard supports RAID, and if it's one of the following chipset platforms... then it may support only upto 2x drives in RAID-0
Intel 865/875 chipset-based platforms uses ICH5 RAID (ICH5R) Intel 915/925X chipset-based platforms uses ICH6 RAID (ICH6R) Intel ICH7 RAID, ICH7 Digital Office, ICH7 Digital Home (ICH7R/DO/DH) that found in newer Intel desktop chipset platforms which are Intel 945/955X/975X may support upto 4x drives in RAID-0. Intel 965 chipset-based platforms that supports RAID will be using either ICH8R, ICH8DH or ICH8DO (or maybe more coming, or already exists) which may support setting up RAID-0 with using up to 6x drives. Last edited by PangingJr; Sep 21, 2006 at 04:20 AM. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2006, 03:01 PM
|
Thread Starter
#19
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
ICH8 doesn't support RAID period, someone I know just got a P5B Asus motherboard with a 965 chipset with ICH8 and unless I totally missed it somewhere which I doubt, then I couldn't get it to RAID
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2006, 03:58 PM
|
#20 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,989
Rep Power: 71 |
ICH8 base as well as ICH7 base, ICH6 base, and ICH5 base do not suport RAID.
Asus P5B uses ICH8 base, so yes, it's not support Intel RAID, nor Intel Matrix Storage Technology. P5B Deluxe/WiFi-AP, P5B Deluxe and P5B-E, all uses ICH8R (or ICH8DH, ICH8DO), therefore these boards's chipset support RAID as well as Intel Matrix Storage Technology. Last edited by PangingJr; Sep 21, 2006 at 04:04 PM. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2006, 07:02 PM
|
#21 |
|
Lurking DriverHeaven
|
so it needs to have the R at the end in order to tell the potential buyer of the MoBo that it will support raid or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2006, 07:56 PM
|
#22 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,989
Rep Power: 71 |
the Intel ICH7R / ICH7DH / ICH7DO is much better by far than the ICH7 Base (short name ICH7)
same things goes for the ICH8 chipset family. i'll explain it some other time. maker of the motherboard will usually list both the correct chipsets and detailed specifications of the motherboard on its web pages. check it out, and if you are not sure whether or not the motherboard and its chipset will support RAID, AHCI and Intel Matrix Storage Technology you can post the motherboard name here, and i'll help you checking it out. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2006, 03:17 PM
|
Thread Starter
#23
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
Well its a little late now but thanks for the offer
I just wish the P5B came with some form of RAID other than the stupid eSATA/internal SATA port RAID solution which is dumb to me (Except for mirrorring main drive to an external one) because its a great board except for that
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2006, 04:11 PM
|
#24 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,989
Rep Power: 71 |
if you've ever read the "Conroe Support" thread in the Motherboards forum that Necrosis starts it a while ago, you would see that i've posted quite a few info regarding the Intel's North Bridge/South Bridge chipsets...
anyway, here is a brief info... with the board that uses ICH8 base, the SATA controller/ports will only be in IDE mode. with the board that uses ICH8R, the SATA controller/ports can be used as in... 1) IDE mode 2) or Advanced Host Controller Interface (AHCI) mode - allows you to use the hard drive's and controller's advanced SATA features, Native Command Queuing, native hot plug, and power management. 3) or RAID-Ready mode - one hard drive with AHCI enabled and the system is ready for RAID setup 4) or RAID - config for RAID and by using more than one hard drives, some of the AHCI features are already included in this mode, some may have to be enabled in BIOS, so that the AHCI BIOS will be loaded during system boots. both 2) and 3) you'll get a better disk performance (real-world performance) on your computer more than using just IDE mode. however, the F6 drivers installs... or the slipstreaming AHCI or RAID drivers for a Windows installation disc is required. and AFAIK, in some cases, the ICH8 and ICH8R or ICH7 and ICH7R/DH/DO SB chipsets can be the same... the real difference between them will be at their firmware and the motherboard's BIOS. Last edited by PangingJr; Sep 22, 2006 at 04:26 PM. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2006, 09:12 PM
|
Thread Starter
#25
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
I see.... P5B still has no RAID but it does have AHCI so should that be enabled?
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2006, 09:33 PM
|
#26 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,989
Rep Power: 71 |
Quote:
some of Intel 965 chipset family motherboard that do not uses "ICH8R" as its South Bridge, but in addition to the Intel ICH8 which does not support RAID/AHCI (but IDE Mode only) the motherboard's maker do include a third-party SATA controller like "JMicron JMB363/366"... the JMB36X supports RAID and AHCI and IDE mode... an example of this kind of motherboard will be Gigabyte "GA-965P-DS3". |
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2006, 09:34 PM
|
Thread Starter
#27
|
|
DriverHeaven Extreme Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,794
Rep Power: 0 |
It says in there it can do IDE mode or AHCI for the ICH8 SATA controllers and it does have a JMicron eSata raid thing (which is stupid) but in theory is AHCI better?
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2006, 09:55 PM
|
#28 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,989
Rep Power: 71 |
"in theory is AHCI better?"
in a very short answer, yes... if it's belong to the Intel's (cause i've never had any experiences with other chipsets...nor other controller that supports AHCI) and your hard drive suports the performance enhancing technologies, NCQ... google "Benefits_of_Intel_Matrix_Storage_Technology.p df" and if you can find it, then read all about the Intel's RAID, Matrix RAID and AHCI. |
|
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2006, 07:23 PM
|
#29 | |
|
Obvious Closet Brony Pony
|
AHCI (i call it PURE SATA mode as the alternative is usually IDE Emulation), is EXCEPTIONALLY better performance wise.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 27, 2006, 12:48 PM
|
#30 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,989
Rep Power: 71 |
Asus may use only the JMicron "JMB360" (or might be "JMB361") chip on the "P5B" base model board to controlling the eSATA port that you mentioned. and the rest and main SATA ports that exists on the board are controlled by ICH8 (base) of Intel's.
JMicron JMB36X chip... http://www.jmicron.com/Products.html ================ JMB360- PCIe to SATA II Host Controller JMB361- PCIe to 1*SATA II and 1*PATA Host Controller JMB363- PCIe to 2*SATA II and 1*PATA Host Controller JMB366- PCIe to 2*SATA II and 2*PATA Host Controller ================= in a different example of board that is also using the JMicron "JMB36X" chip in additional to the main chipsets... the Gigabyte "GA-965P-DS4" that i'm having now has 8 SATA ports, 6 of them are controlled by the Intel's ICH8R (which is under full capacity of the ICH8R chip.), 4 out of these 6 ports (which is SATA Port0-3) can be set in BIOS to fully support AHCI features, the rest 2 ports (SATA Port4-5) will only be getting part of the AHCI features. the other 2 SATA ports (GSATAII0 and GSATAII1) *and* one IDE/PATA port (which support 2 IDE devices via IDE cable) are all controlled by the third-party chip which is the JMicron "JMB363" (or might be "JMB366"). as in this example, Gigabyte uses the JMicron JMB36X chip on this board and also on a few more boards that i know of which are: "GA-965P-DQ6" and "GA-965P-DS3" that i mentioned earlier... depending on what JMicron JMB36X chip will be using on the board. Gigabyte provides its own drivers to support this JMicron JMB36X Host Controller, and also having its name changed from JMB36X to "GBB36X" in the .inf's drivers installing file, Windows's registry and device manager. Gigabyte also listed this additional 2 SATA ports under some of specifications for the motherboards that are using one of these JMicron JMB36X chips as GIGABYTE SATA2 RAID* or GIGABYTE SATA2 Controller. i found this out after i tried to install drivers in Windows Vista for the GIGABYTE SATA2 RAID (Gigabyte/JMicron chip's) which i also configure RAID under this controller... i found that the drivers for this controller that exists in the motherboard's drivers CD and on the Gigabyte web sites do not support Vista RC1, but, however i can use the JMicron JMB36X's drivers from Asus boards to make the controller working under both Windows XP x64 and Vista RC1 x86 builds. note-- GIGABYTE SATA2 RAID is not the same as Intel's SATA RAID (and Matrix RAID and AHCI). it has its own RAID BIOS option ROM, Windows RAID drivers, Windows program which can be used to create RAID. Last edited by PangingJr; Sep 27, 2006 at 09:52 PM. Reason: add info. |
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
