Nforce4 Ultra-D/SLI-DR/SLI-D RAID Tutorial (updated first post)

[GNU]

Okay i will search for another SATA cable and i will test the Seagate Tool.

 

What? Seagate Enterprise doesn't know my Seagate :confused:

It's a Seagate ST3200822AS.

Another chance is the Bootable Test.

I don't understand. The bootable test can't know my Seagate.

[Bampson]

you do not use the drivers @ F6 if you are not using RAID. If you are using SATA drives but just as normal data drives, no RAID functionality, you do not use F6 drivers. Period.

 

This how I set up one of the new Maxtor 16mb cache drives. However without the SATA raid driver I can't see the options to adjust NCQ etc. in device manager.

 

In this scenario, is it feasible to load the driver using F6 to enable this craptonality, however limited NCQ may be?

[RGone]

You can 'even' change "only" the sata driver which is in the SW IDE driver for that single channel of the sata that you have the drive attached to and no other channel need have change if one so desired and did it from Device manager and then should have that option you seem to wish to see.

 

RGone... :confused: as usual.

 

This how I set up one of the new Maxtor 16mb cache drives. However without the SATA raid driver I can't see the options to adjust NCQ etc. in device manager.

 

In this scenario, is it feasible to load the driver using F6 to enable this craptonality, however limited NCQ may be?

[LazyBum]

Yes, the tools that Seagate has on their website for testing their drives. I know that you have tried two cables but the possibility does exist that both are bad. I had a guy go throug four cables before he found a good one. The problem was that he was bending the cable right at the connector causing them to give lots of errors. When he installed the last one he didn't bend the cable so tight and it has worked fine since then.

 

Just trying to cover all the possibilities. Hang in there!

 

 

Hmm, could partly explain why my benchies are so lousy in this new build. HD benches in Sandra and Everest aren't very good. I'll try smoothing out the cable bends to see if it helps. If not, does anyone recommend any SATA cables with 90 degree connectors? My P160 case has the drives mounted sideways, so there isn't much space between the side panel and the drives.

I know the main reason my benchmarks are rotten is bad memory, but hopefully, my OCZ 4000VX is on the way They were listed as in stock when I ordered, now they are shown as out of stock (Monarch).

 

Good tutorial BTW, Angry Games

I wish I had found this site before I tore down my old machine to build this one, it would have saved me a ton of grief!

[BLJ]

Raid on DFI NF4?

 

oh yeah.. that's a "black subject" for me...

 

the DFI NF4 boards are great. not only great, they are awesome... everywhere but @ S-ATA Raid(0?) performance.

 

look here

 

i've also contacted DFI Support on this matter. But that really wasn't helpful, so after 3 or 4 mails i cancelled asking them, it took 4 mails until person 'on the other side' took notice, that i'm _NOT_ talking about Performance in games etc. etc.

And, anyway, he just tried to convince me of that it would be normal for every board etc. and so on.

 

Will post my mails in the above linked thread...

 

cya

 

PS: tried every Bios available so far.

[BLJ]

HDTach has sometimes problems with bigger Stripesizes and doesn't benchmark them correctly. Anyway....

 

for those of you speaking/reading german:

 

here some presumptions and suggestions about the Stripe size etc.

 

short summary (RAID 0 Stripesize and NTFS Clustersize):

 

n = Numbers of Harddisks in Raid 0 Array

NTFS Clustersize: from 512Bytes to 64KBytes

Stripesize: From 4Kbyte to 256KByte... (depending on Controller)

 

-> Ideal: NTFS Clustersize = n*Stripe Size.

This, because NTFS splits the files into Clusters, these clusters are written on the Harddisks. If a Cluster is 8KB and the Stripesize is 16KB, then two clusters are only on one HDD of the array (because of 2x8KB = 16KB).

 

The Problem is... a cluster belongs to exactly one file. So, if you're having 64KB Cluster-size and lots of 1KB Files, you're wasting a lot of space.

Another problem is, the smaller the stripe- and clustersize, the more managment effort is needed...

 

another hint: (Windows) Swap is allways readed and written in 4KB Blocks. So Swap on on Partitions with cluster Size smaller than 4KB is slow... and thus, not recommended!

 

For me, i found the following suitable:

2x Samsung P-ATA 160GB, Raid0, Stripesize 16KByte

-C: System -> Cluster-Size 4KByte

-D: Data(smaller Files, documents, small tools etc.) -> Cluster-Size 4KByte

 

4x Maxtor DM10 200GB, Raid0, Stripesize 16KByte

-E: Data(larger Files, i.E. Movies etc.) -> Cluster Size 64KByte

 

 

cya

[GNU]

Any idea for my problem?

[red930]

HDTach has sometimes problems with bigger Stripesizes and doesn't benchmark them correctly. Anyway....cya

Just what the doctor ordered. Very good work and examples.

 

ExRoadie

[GNU]

@ExRoadie: About my problem. Could i use any tool to "overclock" the speed? Maybe is my cable and my HDD okay but only a Nf4 or another Driver limited the speed?

[red930]

@ExRoadie: About my problem. Could i use any tool to "overclock" the speed? Maybe is my cable and my HDD okay but only a Nf4 or another Driver limited the speed?

 

 

Sorry about the late response. Dealing with bad weather and a major internet provider in the area is down hard.

 

The only suggestion I can come up with is to make sure you are using the latest BIOS for your motherboard.

 

I also looked at some older benchmarks and your drives are not any slower than others drives. I have a feeling that you were using a benchmark test that wasn't showing the true speed. Now that you are running a proper benchmark you are getting close to the actual right speeds.

[GNU]

Sorry about the late response. Dealing with bad weather and a major internet provider in the area is down hard.

 

The only suggestion I can come up with is to make sure you are using the latest BIOS for your motherboard.

 

I also looked at some older benchmarks and your drives are not any slower than others drives. I have a feeling that you were using a benchmark test that wasn't showing the true speed. Now that you are running a proper benchmark you are getting close to the actual right speeds.

 

Thank you for your information. I use 3/25 (it's the lastest bios).

About Benchmark. I made this Benchmark while i used FTP-Programs to download big files. It's maybe the reason of my bad Benchmark? If not so i think i have a bad HDD. It's not fast as a good SATA HDD (see Benchmark Examples @SATA150).

For a better benchmark: Shall i use HD-Tach without running programs? (only the important run).

[red930]

For a better benchmark: Shall i use HD-Tach without running programs? (only the important run).

Wow, GNU.

 

It's that kind of important information that we need on the front end of these threads.

 

Always Defrag before a benchmark.

 

Reboot the machine before a benchmark.

 

Never run any other applications during a benchmark.

 

Give it another try and let us know the results.