Burke's SATA RAID-0 Comparison!

Anything related to hardware (CPU/MoBo/Video/FSB/BIOS, etc.), hardware settings, overclocking, cooling, cool cases, case mods, hardware mods, post pics of your unique creations here.
Post Reply
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Burke's SATA RAID-0 Comparison!

Post by Brk »

I won't go into some big professional HardOCP/AnandTech/Tech Report review because, frankly, my hands, wrists and eyes are tired. FYI, I only tested RAID-0 with a 16k stripe and 4k clusters, so this isn't an uber-comparison of across-the-board RAID performance, just a setup that most RAIDers are likely to try.

Test Setup:
- ABIT IC7-G (1.1 BIOS)
- ASUS P4C800 Deluxe (1004.005 BIOS)
- 3.0 GHz P4 800 MHz FSB
- (2) Western Digital Raptor 10k RPM in RAID-0, 16k stripe, NTFS w/4 kb clusters, defragged
- XP Pro SP1 w/all updates
- Intel Chipset Drivers 5.0
- Intel Application Accelerator 3.0 RAID Edition
- Latest drivers for all three SATA controllers

Controllers:
- Intel ICH5R & Silicon Image 3112 on IC7-G
- Promise FastTrak 378 on P4C800 Deluxe

**********

Promise FastTrak 378 SATA Results

HD Tach
Image


SiSoft Sandra
Image


ATTO Disk Benchmark
Image


DiskSpeed32
Image


PCMark2002
Image

**********
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Burke's SATA RAID-0 Comparison, Part 2: Silicon Image 3112

Post by Brk »

Test Setup:
- ABIT IC7-G (1.1 BIOS)
- 3.0 GHz P4 800 MHz FSB
- (2) Western Digital Raptor 10k RPM in RAID-0, 16k stripe, NTFS w/4 kb clusters, defragged
- XP Pro SP1 w/all updates
- Latest drivers

**********

Silicon Image 3112 SATAraid Results

HD Tach
Image


SiSoft Sandra
Image


ATTO Disk Benchmark
Image


DiskSpeed32
Image


PCMark2002
Image
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Burke's SATA RAID-0 Comparison, Part 3: Intel ICH5R

Post by Brk »

Test Setup:
- ABIT IC7-G (1.1 BIOS)
- 3.0 GHz P4 800 MHz FSB
- (2) Western Digital Raptor 10k RPM in RAID-0, 16k stripe, NTFS w/4 kb clusters, defragged
- XP Pro SP1 w/all updates
- Latest drivers

**********

Intel ICH5 RAID Results

HD Tach
Image


SiSoft Sandra
Image


ATTO Disk Benchmark
Image


DiskSpeed32
Image


PCMark2002
Image
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Burke's SATA RAID-0 Comparison, Part 4: Conclusion

Post by Brk »

SATA RAID-0 Conclusion:
Suffice it to say, the ICH5 RAID crushes both the onboard Promise controller on the P4C800 Deluxe and the additional Silicon Image controller on the IC7-G with the Raptors in RAID-0. I actually ran HD Tach five times to ensure that the Intel score wasn't a fluke...I got virtually the same results all five times.

If you want the best SATA RAID-0 performance from an onboard/on-chip controller, the Intel ICH5R cannot be beaten. Some of the scores between the three, such as Sandra's File System Benchmark, aren't widely disparate, but the Promise and Silicon Image controllers just couldn't maintain the burst rate and, more importantly, the consistency and balance of read/write performance offered by Intel's southbridge solution. As you can see in the HD Tach benchmarks, the CPU utilization was higher on the ICH5R, but in my opinion the tremendous increase in burst rate and sustained read/write more than makes up for the 2% or so jump.

One note: the ASUS P4C800 Deluxe features a "vanilla" ICH5, meaning it does NOT have the integrated RAID controller; so, if you want high-end SATA RAID-0 performance, I would avoid the P4C800 until ASUS (hopefully) releases a revision that includes the ICH5R.

EDIT: Prometheus over at Asusboards.com has also done a comparison of the Raptors' RAID-0 performance on the ICH5R, using all the available stripe sizes. It's a good read, check out his thread here.

And it's official...I hate benchmarking! :D
User avatar
YARDofSTUF
Posts: 70006
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2000 12:00 am
Location: USA

Post by YARDofSTUF »

I demand more benchmarks!
User avatar
Brent
SG VIP
Posts: 42153
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 1999 12:00 pm

Post by Brent »

Awesome comparisons though, thanks for that

it shows that the best SATA RAID performance is Intel ICH5R, which is just very nice

it seems Intel really has a handle on the latest technologies
"Would you mind not standing on my chest, my hats on fire." - The Doctor
bigjohns97
New Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 10:41 pm

Post by bigjohns97 »

would you recommend using this raid-0 setup on the intel ich-r controller as a system drive. I mean in every experience i have had with raid as a system drive it has made the os sluggish and not very responsive.
User avatar
A_old
Posts: 10663
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2000 12:00 am
Location: Atlanta

Post by A_old »

Originally posted by bigjohns97
would you recommend using this raid-0 setup on the intel ich-r controller as a system drive. I mean in every experience i have had with raid as a system drive it has made the os sluggish and not very responsive.


Intel's ata controllers have always been top notch. definately use it.
User avatar
yikes
Senior Member
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2000 12:00 am
Location: Toronto

Post by yikes »

Burke,

between the controllers it looks as though there is almost a 2x speed increase from the best to the worst of the benchmarks. Do you feel you can really see this performance on a daily basis of using your PC? As I am intersted getting something similar to that raid setup.

YiKeS
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Post by Brk »

Originally posted by yikes
Burke,

between the controllers it looks as though there is almost a 2x speed increase from the best to the worst of the benchmarks. Do you feel you can really see this performance on a daily basis of using your PC? As I am intersted getting something similar to that raid setup.

YiKeS


Honestly, unless you're moving large files or big volumes of multiple files, the great differences won't be all that noticeable.

However, you will notice that Windows and other larger programs install a lot faster, and the loading times for some apps will be appreciably quicker. SCSI fans will likely tell you the same thing.
NeoLev
Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:07 am
Location: USA

Post by NeoLev »

Originally posted by Amro
Intel's ata controllers have always been top notch. definately use it.


is that so amro son???
lol
NeoLev

[WinXP Pro][2.4 C MHz Pentium 4 running @ 2.83 Stock voltage][Gigabyte 8KNXP Deluxe][2x512MB Kingston Hyper X DDR 3500] [FSB @ 1.1 GHZ] [Linksys 10/100 NIC][ATI 9700 Pro][2x80GB WD 7200RPM 8MB Cache Raid 0]
NeoLev
Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:07 am
Location: USA

Post by NeoLev »

Nice testing burke thanks for the info.

If you have any spare change from all that stuff you tested don't forget about the poor people.
NeoLev

[WinXP Pro][2.4 C MHz Pentium 4 running @ 2.83 Stock voltage][Gigabyte 8KNXP Deluxe][2x512MB Kingston Hyper X DDR 3500] [FSB @ 1.1 GHZ] [Linksys 10/100 NIC][ATI 9700 Pro][2x80GB WD 7200RPM 8MB Cache Raid 0]
jinu117

Post by jinu117 »

Nice read.
I just sigined on to say this.
Read your chart on Promise IDE again.
Does the write look normal? I've had 2 different P4 boards with Promise raid and this is first time I see such an interesting #s.
Now, granted, you are reviewing it as is. But read portion of story doesn't quite "CRASH" the competition as you mentioned. Once the problem is fixed (it darned better be if ASUS wants to float in this compatitive market), I can't really see more than 2-5% difference with promise vs ICH5 until maybe we see 2nd phase of Raptor with higher throughput. (or raid-5 yeah... ICH won't get there for a while either).
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Post by Brk »

Originally posted by jinu117
Nice read.
I just sigined on to say this.
Read your chart on Promise IDE again.
Does the write look normal? I've had 2 different P4 boards with Promise raid and this is first time I see such an interesting #s.
Now, granted, you are reviewing it as is. But read portion of story doesn't quite "CRASH" the competition as you mentioned. Once the problem is fixed (it darned better be if ASUS wants to float in this compatitive market), I can't really see more than 2-5% difference with promise vs ICH5 until maybe we see 2nd phase of Raptor with higher throughput. (or raid-5 yeah... ICH won't get there for a while either).


Actually, I read today there is a confirmed problem with the Promise 378 SATA controller and 8 MB cache drives...that's likely the culprit, because those writes on the Promise controller are HEINOUS.

In reference to the "crushing" by the ICH5R, I was speaking in terms of sustained read/write as well as burst rate. Additionally, the ICH5R takes the SATA controller off the PCI bus, which allows for true 150 MB/sec per the SATA spec. The Promise and Silicon Image is limited my the PCI bus.
s.stormont

Post by s.stormont »

As someone who just had this bite me in the a$$, you did enable Write back caching in the Promise Array Manager on the P4C800 before conducting your testing, right?
Brk
SG VIP
Posts: 29518
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2001 12:00 pm

Post by Brk »

Originally posted by s.stormont
As someone who just had this bite me in the a$$, you did enable Write back caching in the Promise Array Manager on the P4C800 before conducting your testing, right?


Sure did.
Post Reply