3 harddrive raid 0 results what do you guys think? - Page 2 - Overclock.net

vuxdu · 07-29-09

Alright I just got done changing my stripe size to 128kb and enabling the write back cache.. Here are my results!

For the Access time I've always had around 16ms even with two hard drives.

What I don't get is why is my CPU usage so high up in HD tune, though it seems normal in hd tach.

Luda · 07-29-09

holy crap.... nice numbers. makes me want to upgrade my raid....

DuckieHo · 07-29-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by vuxdu

Also I don't get why my minimum gets so low..

Because the drives are using the inner portion of the platters.

If you short-stroke to 75% of the array (750GB), you'll remove that tail end of the performance curve and push up your average performance.

the_beast · 07-29-09

I would go back to 64KB, or even 32KB if you can.

The larger stripe looks better in benches, but smaller stripes are usually better for real-world OS use.

If you can afford to lose the space, I would short stroke the disks by dropping the partition size as Duckie suggests. I would go a little further though - drop to a 200GB partition & leave the rest of the space empty, and you should push down your access times a little too.

vuxdu · 07-29-09

So to short stroke my Hard Drives for example I just pick 200GB while I set up the raid in the BIOS correct? Alright I'll do that in a hour or so when I get back

vuxdu · 07-29-09

Alright I just set up short stroke on my harddrives and changed the stripe size to 64kb here are the results! I think its quite impressive!

Wadkiller · 07-29-09

Damn dude, thats not impressive thats freaking excellent. Well done.

I'm contemplating getting a single SSD (mayeb a Mushkin Europe series 2 or Falcon 64gb) just for my OS, don't need insane reads & writes & then i'll just get one or two WD caviar blacks.

Have a read here: http://www.techwarelabs.com/seagate_1-5tb-mod/ When you have some extra cash for a larger drive or two, really worth it IMO.

Daney · 07-29-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by vuxdu

Alright I just set up short stroke on my harddrives and changed the stripe size to 64kb here are the results! I think its quite impressive!

Isn't 128k stripe better for performance?

Either way, I doubt you can beat that speed with onboard raid.

I think I love you.

vuxdu · 07-29-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wadkiller

Damn dude, thats not impressive thats freaking excellent. Well done.

I'm contemplating getting a single SSD (mayeb a Mushkin Europe series 2 or Falcon 64gb) just for my OS, don't need insane reads & writes & then i'll just get one or two WD caviar blacks.

Have a read here: http://www.techwarelabs.com/seagate_1-5tb-mod/ When you have some extra cash for a larger drive or two, really worth it IMO.

Thanks

, wow SSD I would jump on those when prices fall. Also that article was a great read! I wonder how a couple of 7200.12 would do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daney

Isn't 128k stripe better for performance?

Either way, I doubt you can beat that speed with onboard raid.

I think I love you.

I am not exactly sure about stripe size, so I just picked 64 since its in the middle of 32 and 128

candy_van · 07-30-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by sexybastard

The access time is a little off IMO. My two AAKS get 11.8ms.

The average transfer is pretty good though

I get around 170MB/s

Really? I got 15.9ms with 2x of mine, they are the single platter models (00B3A0 if I remembered that right LOL).

@ OP, looks to be a nice bump in improvement over 2x

My MIN/MAX/AVG xfer rates in HD Tune are 89/202/157.

		Overclock.net - Overclocking.net > Components > Hard Drives & Storage
3 harddrive raid 0 results what do you guys think?

07-29-09	#14 (permalink)
the_beast Mobo Master Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,002 Rep: 143 Unique Rep: 98 Trader Rating: 0	I would go back to 64KB, or even 32KB if you can. The larger stripe looks better in benches, but smaller stripes are usually better for real-world OS use. If you can afford to lose the space, I would short stroke the disks by dropping the partition size as Duckie suggests. I would go a little further though - drop to a 200GB partition & leave the rest of the space empty, and you should push down your access times a little too.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)