Which RAID controller for (4) Intel X25-M 80GB G2's (RAID0)

S

ShiShKaBoB

Gawd
Joined
Aug 10, 2004
Messages
831
I currently run (2) Intel X25-M 80GB G2 SSD's in RAID 0 on a EVGA 758 3xSli with ICH10R controller.

I recently purchased 2 more and plan to run a (4) SSD array My question is simply which RAID controller should I choose for Windows 7 64, and 4 Intel X25-M's for a RAID0 array.

I have searched and have not found any one with an opinion and solid facts.

My goal here is to achieve;
250 x 4 = 900-1000MBs Read
80 x 4 = 300-340MBs Write

From what I have seen the ICH10R dose not read faster than >/=600mbps when RAIDing 4 160GB X-25M's.

Which RAID controller would you recommend to achieve my specified Read and Write goals. Thanks for the advice.
 
Thanks for the advice, I installed the 4 on the ICH10R controller and I ended up getting exactly what I thought I would get off of the onboard controller. I actually could not find any members posting their results with the controller your mentioned, but the search function may not be picking it up. I'll keep looking, I ran a quick CDM to see what I was getting.

quadssd.jpg
 
ShiShKaBoB said:
Thanks for the advice, I installed the 4 on the ICH10R controller and I ended up getting exactly what I thought I would get off of the onboard controller. I actually could not find any members posting their results with the controller your mentioned, but the search function may not be picking it up. I'll keep looking, I ran a quick CDM to see what I was getting.

quadssd.jpg
Click to expand...

Three x25m 80gb g1's on ich10r

cdml.png

hdtunessd.png
 
Ill probably end up getting the 9260-4i - thanks.

I wonder why the 4KB writes are faster on the 3 SSd's on the same board with same ICH10R.. you think its just the G1 / G2 difference?
 
Actually if you are looking to just run RAID 0 the first one you linked will be faster.
It doesnt have a XOR processor and extra memory so the data path is essentially shorter and has less latency = Faster speeds! :)
 
ShiShKaBoB said:
Ill probably end up getting the 9260-4i - thanks.

I wonder why the 4KB writes are faster on the 3 SSd's on the same board with same ICH10R.. you think its just the G1 / G2 difference?
Click to expand...

could be, what does your hdtune look like?
and what firmware are you running?
 
This one man: LSi 9211-4i
Follow up on the testing development on this LINK
Its a HBA, meaning it will only work for simple raid levels, but it offers better acces time and na Raid overhead.
 
Roliath said:
could be, what does your hdtune look like?
and what firmware are you running?
Click to expand...

Im running the 02HD on all 4. HDtune looks like im ICH10R limited. I also have a Samsung 1TB F3 running on the same controller so maybe that my results differ?

8mby.jpg
 
ShiShKaBoB said:
Im running the 02HD on all 4. HDtune looks like im ICH10R limited. I also have a Samsung 1TB F3 running on the same controller so maybe that my results differ?

8mby.jpg
Click to expand...

I thought the limit of the ICH10R was around 670ish mb. I have 2x1tb in raid 0 and another 80gb intel g1 on my ich10r as well. What board are you using?
 
ShiShKaBoB said:
Im using a EVGA 758 3xSLI A1 motherboard. Still curious why the difference?
Click to expand...
well now I don't know what to say either! lol
i'm running an evga x58 too, my drives are fairly new.
I haven't been running them that long, i'm using 80.9GB out of 223 GB. My cpu is clocked at 4.2ghz if that makes an difference.
 
Yeah, I wonder what I would get if I just ran the 3. I have seen someone else posting better performance with 3 than 4 X25-M's.. I'll have to give it a try. My 920 is clocked at 3.65 so maybe the extra mhz does make a difference. What's your block size on your Stripe? Anyhow I will most likely be going with a HBA or RAID controller after reading up on the info provided by XS Janus; thanks btw..

XS Janus said:
This one man: LSi 9211-4i
Follow up on the testing development on this LINK
Its a HBA, meaning it will only work for simple raid levels, but it offers better acces time and na Raid overhead.
Click to expand...

So Im new to the HBA/Controller realm - though I feel it will be catching on quick.. but the difference between the 9211 4i, and 9211 8i is what? other than the additional port? I think I would probably pick up a couple more SSD's down the road to add them to the array so I might end up with 6-8 SSD's in RAID 0, what would be the better card to purchase?

EDIT: Okay I just read up another 2 hours worth.. Im leaning towards the 9260 4i.. but according to LSI's website;

The four-port MegaRAID® SAS 9260-4i controller provides a new level of performance and data protection for internal storage systems using up to 32 SATA or SAS hard drives or solid state drives.
Click to expand...

Im trying to figure out how to run more than 4 drives off of this. Is there some sort of special cable required? If so, care to share a link?
 
Last edited:
The difference are only in ports.
The card has no cache, but cache have on the is better suited for its indented purpose, according to some and more than enough of it.
Read up on that thread and than decide. The card is pretty cheap and future proof. Loading it up with 6bbit ssds would be awesome! :)
 
XS Janus said:
The card has no cache, but cache have on the is better suited for its indented purpose, according to some and more than enough of it.
Click to expand...

Ahh, sorry, what?:confused:

I think I hear what you're saying, I think it just came out wrong.

It looks like the Seq read suffers on the 9211, compared to the 9260, yes the access time is better on the 9211, but does it not appear that the 9260 is the "faster" card overall? Or should we wait for more testing?
 
ShiShKaBoB said:
Ahh, sorry, what?:confused:

I think I hear what you're saying, I think it just came out wrong.

It looks like the Seq read suffers on the 9211, compared to the 9260, yes the access time is better on the 9211, but does it not appear that the 9260 is the "faster" card overall? Or should we wait for more testing?
Click to expand...

I'll reply with a quote:
nitrobass24 said:
Actually if you are looking to just run RAID 0 the first one you linked will be faster.
It doesnt have a XOR processor and extra memory so the data path is essentially shorter and has less latency = Faster speeds! :)
Click to expand...

I remembered that you were looking for Raid 0, which the 9211 would be better suited for. The 9260 has extra cache and a more powerful processor to process the XOR calculations for raid 5/6, which you don't need at raid 0.

Nitrobass: good looking out :) though the XOR processor is integrated into the same chip with these new raid on chip designs, so the latency incurred from the lack of such circuitry isn't that great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top