Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Angry_Games

hard drives & raid - benchmark and compare!

Recommended Posts

Just a note on my Raptor charts I posted somewhere in here.

 

I installed my first dual core CPU today. No difference in my HD tach. I guess it doesnt effect that much.

 

from a 3200+ single core to a 4800+ dual core.

 

I gained .1ms in access but thats prob just a coincidence. and my cpu utilization is 3%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LithoTech
Just a note on my Raptor charts I posted somewhere in here.

 

I installed my first dual core CPU today. No difference in my HD tach. I guess it doesnt effect that much.

 

from a 3200+ single core to a 4800+ dual core.

 

I gained .1ms in access but thats prob just a coincidence. and my cpu utilization is 3%.

 

That's a nice upgrade, and the hell with drive benchies! /flex :D

 

Time to update teh sig!11 :eek: :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question..

 

got 2x raptors in raid 0 on nvidia raid controller stripe size 32 (tested to be best) for me def clustor sizr.

 

 

im get 2 more rap (second hand) and wanted to put them together to make raid 0, x4 drives.

 

whats the best stripe/clustor? if 32 strips is for 2 drives , how does one work out for 4.

 

ie what stripe & clustor size, (ill use part magic to change clustor size)

?

 

i tested the 2 drives on the sil and the nvidia and the diff is the burst speed,

 

sil does about 111 mb/s nvidia does about 142/sec ..+ faster

 

sil 3114 limmited max transfer viA PCI BUS is 66x2mhz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im get 2 more rap (second hand) and wanted to put them together to make raid 0, x4 drives.

 

whats the best stripe/clustor? if 32 strips is for 2 drives , how does one work out for 4.

In my testing I found that if you double the number of drives you should double the stripe size. The cluster size can stay the same but you want to make sure the stripe is large enough to use all four drives at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small note, one that is probably not going to be taking kindly, or seriously.

I've had major issues with pm/vm when resizing partitions(not really data loss ones, just bad structers and windows not seeing it's limits before it's to late sorta things).

This I would assume affects changing cluster sizes.

 

I'd totally reccomend del'ing the partition and making it anew, and doing it that way, instead of using any prog to resize it in any way...

 

pm/vm are good progs though, I use them presonally along with other progs(windows).

However I no longer resize partitions.

 

Had probs resizing fat16, fat32 and hpfs.

Not sure about ntfs though... :.

Now that I think about it..., oh yeah lol, I did'nt have to resize those anyways, it was only the fat32 ones.

(Now I'm wonering how I setup the fat32 partition I have, windows has a limit on the size it alows it to format...)

Whatever lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all:

 

I’m hoping you can assist with what seems to be poor RAID performance with two WD drives. Also, can I make changes to NCQ etc. in Device Manager without damaging my RAID array?

24519483380.jpg 24519483381.jpg 24519534616.jpg

Thank you in advace for any advice or suggestions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the controller section (last pic) uncheck "Enable Read Caching" and "Enable Command Queing" on both channels. Reboot and defrag after that.

 

Middle pic - Atto settings are incorrect, Select "Neither" under Direct I/O and change Length to 32 MB

 

1st PIC - seems really wierd. I'd remove and re-install after doing 1 and 2.

Post screenshots of ATTO and HD Tach back in thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any tips for this abysmal display???

 

hdtach9306ty7.jpg

 

If you look at my previous results with 4 drives in RAID 0 compared to these results in RAID 0+1 it's like night and day. I went from average read of 140 down to less than 60 in this configuration. Best to go to three drives in RAID 0 and use the fourth for storage? Really don't think I need to spend any more money on one more drive as strictly storage to get the numbers I was getting with all four in RAID 0. I thought 0+1 was gonna be close in performance but thse results are just horrible.....sure, burst went up and CPU went down :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am about to put stripe 0 (4 raptor 36g drives) together

 

but i found out that 3 drive are they same (current 8m model) and 1 is a older model that does not have command queuing.

 

ie 3x cq

 

and

1 does not

 

will this cause any problems with my setup..

 

can -and should i turn off cq for all the drives in raid, (you can do this in non raid)

 

but i dont know if you can do this in raid.

 

and should i set up the drive in raid (nvidia) as drive 4 (sata connector)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAID-0+1 will always have slower throughput due to the fact that the data has to be written to the 0 part of the array then copied and verified to the 1 part of the array.

 

You lose the bandwidth but gain data protection.

 

I've never been a big fan of RAID-0+1 for this reason. I run RAID-0 for bandwidth and make copies on cheap drives for storage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...