PDA

View Full Version : Calling all Raid 0 users...


jAkUp
01-02-06, 07:13 PM
What do you have your stripe size set to? I have found that 128 or 64 is usually the best for general usage I think.

Rytr
01-02-06, 07:17 PM
I usually just leave in at 32 as set by windows. I have tried different stripe sizes in the past but with a mixed bag of results.

keith33
01-02-06, 08:51 PM
128, NF4 default, I like it :p

Rytr
01-02-06, 09:10 PM
NF4 default is 128? Curious as I just set up Raid 0 on a fresh install and the default was 32 using an NF4 chipset. What did I miss?

keith33
01-02-06, 09:12 PM
No idea, I just set the Array up in the BIOS, maybe it's different for each board. My ICH5R RAID controller on my old Intel 875 board had the same 128kb default so I assumed it was just accepted as a defacto consumer standard.

Rytr
01-02-06, 10:25 PM
Mine was set for 32 but might give 128 to see if makes an improvement. Been awhile since I fooled around with Raid. Think an XP333R was the last board, other than an Intel board, and that was with the ALi Magic chipset. (xmasgrin)

seeker
01-02-06, 11:08 PM
I'm looking for a bit of education here. On my old system, I set the stripe at 4kb, thinking that would give more efficient usage of the drives, but never thought about raid performance. This may have been the reason that the raid performance was far less than spectacular. On my new system I just went with the default, which I believe was for 64 bit, and this system is much better on overall performance. Before reading this thread, I had blamed the quality of my old motherboard, but it appears that I have may been wrong. I hate making assumptions, so I'll just ask, is there is a trade off between harddrive usage, and performance...true? Would going to 128kb be worth higher HD usage?

Medion
01-03-06, 10:27 AM
HD Tach - Try it :)

Not my experience, but quoted from another board:

I get 90-95 MB/s when set in RAID 0 (2 drives) and as always, you need to set the stripe size to 16k as the default of 64k is too big and slows it...
down. usually in the 70MB/s range. 32k strip is good also, but then you need to set cluster size in windows to 8k and window installer only does 4k so you'll need to preformat the raid before installing windows and don't format in the install process.

Golden Boy
01-03-06, 01:12 PM
I am using 64kb on my 2 SCSI drives and it works very well.
I was just asking myself it is "better/faster" to split the raid0 - each drive on one channel of the scsi raid card, or both together.
My current config is raid0 with 2 drives on first and one drive for data storage on 2nd channel...
I could not find a good answer to that yet...

rewt
01-03-06, 02:17 PM
RAID 0 works best when you put each drive on its own separate controller.

seeker
01-03-06, 02:23 PM
RAID 0 works best when you put each drive on its own separate controller.
How do you do that? Right now, I have a Nvidia software controller built on the mobo, but since Linux can't see the drives properly, I'm thinking of adding a PCI controller, so that I can dual boot. When you say use different controllers, does this mean using two physically separate controllers?

seeker
01-03-06, 02:31 PM
rewt,

Is there a typo in your rig's specs.? The AMD 64 3000+ Venice only has a speed of 1.8GHz. I wouldn't think it possible to overclock that much.

rewt
01-03-06, 02:39 PM
How do you do that? Right now, I have a Nvidia software controller built on the mobo, but since Linux can't see the drives properly, I'm thinking of adding a PCI controller, so that I can dual boot. When you say use different controllers, does this mean using two physically separate controllers?

Sorry, I should have used the word "channel" not "controller". Put each drive on its own channel for best performance.

Is there a typo in your rig's specs.? The AMD 64 3000+ Venice only has a speed of 1.8GHz. I wouldn't think it possible to overclock that much.

No typo. Early Venice cores such as mine are great overclockers. I've actually had it at 2.7 but didn't want to fry my board/chipset so I dropped it down some. ;)

seeker
01-03-06, 02:45 PM
Sorry, I should have used the word "channel" not "controller". Put each drive on its own channel for best performance.

Perhaps that is something that I could do with a PCI controller, but not the one on my mobo.

No typo. Early Venice cores such as mine are great overclockers. I've actually had it at 2.7 but didn't want to fry my board/chipset so I dropped it down some. ;)
Great is not the word for it. That is faster than any of the rated speeds of any of the AMD 64 processors. I have never gotten into OCing, so I don't even know if mine has any capability for this, especially since mine is brand new.

rewt
01-03-06, 02:52 PM
Great is not the word for it. That is faster than any of the rated speeds of any of the AMD 64 processors. I have never gotten into OCing, so I don't even know if mine has any capability for this, especially since mine is brand new.

Hehe. Well actually there are some AMD Opteron socket 939 cores out now that are even better. At the time I bought this 3000+ it was one of the best overclockers around. I would expect yours to overclock quite well too.

jAkUp
01-03-06, 02:53 PM
Some of the opteron's overclock even better :D

seeker
01-03-06, 02:58 PM
I would expect yours to overclock quite well too.

Like I said, I have never even thought about it. The only way that I know of to do so is by using Easy Tune, but somewhere, I read that someone didn't think too highly of it, so I haven't messed with it, except for monitoring.

CaptNKILL
01-03-06, 03:14 PM
Like I said, I have never even thought about it. The only way that I know of to do so is by using Easy Tune, but somewhere, I read that someone didn't think too highly of it, so I haven't messed with it, except for monitoring.
Ive had mine at 2.7 as well, it overheated but it ran ;)

These things overclock like freakin mad... Im using the stock cooler and my system idles around 39C and loads around 51C with +0.3 Volts and 700Mhz OC :eek:

seeker
01-03-06, 03:18 PM
Maybe, when I get a bit more comfortable with my rig, I might try OCing, but I kind of like the cool temps. Right now, mine is running at 27C-36C, and I still need to repaste it will a better compound.

CaptNKILL
01-03-06, 03:36 PM
Maybe, when I get a bit more comfortable with my rig, I might try OCing, but I kind of like the cool temps. Right now, mine is running at 27C-36C, and I still need to repaste it will a better compound.
Heh, im still using the stock thermal pad... I was so hyped about getting this thing going I just tossed the heat sink on and started gaming. Eventually that led to me glitching the hell out of Battlefield 1942 because the CPU was overheating at 2.7Ghz :o It was kinda funny, people kept getting stuck inside walls and stuff because the CPU was making mistakes in the collision detection :lol:

My poor CPU... I probably took a year off its life running it like that for a few minutes :(

EDIT: Whoops, sorry for the thread hijack :o

seeker
01-03-06, 04:13 PM
I know that the max temperature on my processor is given at 65C-75C, which I'm sure that none of you are even approaching, but what should I limit the temp to? I'm not even sure what the max temperature is given as a range on this processor, because most of the others only have a single temperature given.

wheeljack12
01-04-06, 12:24 PM
My brother has a scsi u320 raid 0 setup but I can't remember what stripe size I set it to. He's using 2 18gb 15k drives. As for me, In the past with Nforce 4 boards, I noticed that when you use optimal settings(this is for AMD and intel based), it sets it at 64kb. But I have used 128kb stripes with no problem. From what I remember, don't you want a larger stripe since it will give better performance? And the biggest I have seen nforce 4 allow is 128kb.