Overclock.net banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What we see in this review is that scaling is very poor on Z87 and that two drive is more then enough and whit three we can hit a wall.
But I got some nice feeling that X58A-UD3R would have better result.Why?Because it a great board.
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6207/sandisk-extreme-ii-240gb-6-drive-ssd-raid-report/index.html
By the way SanDisk have best SSD at the moment. SanDisk Extreme II has enterprise consistency and 1 of 3 best SSDs when it comes to power consumption for 240GB drive.I am waiting for msata to upgrade my notebook with it,because EVO msata is definitely not a winner.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unit Igor View Post

What we see in this review is that scaling is very poor on Z87 and that two drive is more then enough and whit three we can hit a wall.
But I got some nice feeling that X58A-UD3R would have better result.Why?Because it a great board.
Last I checked, the X58 chipset only has SATA2 Intel ports so I fail to see how it can beat a Z87 chipset-based board. Mind, the wall it's hitting is the DMI so I don't see other Z87-based boards doing significantly better. You'd need a RAID card on QPI for higher throughput.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Yes you got that right I am talking nonsense, you cant jump over DMI wall.But what you think why they never change DMI for QPI which has 25.6 GB/s bandhwith.With that bandwidth we would never had problem to RAID six sata3 drives.
Maybe CPU in the end cant handle that much bandwidth.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unit Igor View Post

Yes you got that right I am talking nonsense, you cant jump over DMI wall.But what you think why they never change DMI for QPI which has 25.6 GB/s bandwidth.With that bandwidth we would never had problem to RAID six sata3 drives.
Maybe CPU in the end cant handle that much bandwidth.
I have no idea why SATA is still on DMI. My guess, SATA is traditionally an interface for mechanical HDD's so I reckon designs were based around that paradigm. Hopefully, we'll see that change with M.2 and SATA Express.

RAM benches can go that high. Granted, some serious CPU power might be required to deal with an array of drives capable of reaching that speed. I think this might make for interesting reading:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-dc-s3700-raid-0-benchmarks,3480.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
953 Posts
Regarding QPI, Haswell CPUs don't have a QPI link, and both Sandy and Ivy Bridge CPUs don't have QPI either. Of course the chipset, or PCH in this case, is what matters, but as rui-no-onna said, all we have is DMI, and now with six SATA III ports on Haswell chipsets, we hit the DMI wall with RAID arrays quickly.

Igor, I never had extra good RAID speeds on my X58 board, which is really using the ICH10R SATA chipset. I had both three and four 64GB 830's on it, and above three drives, things changed. First three of those 830's, and then four:





Strange, isn't it? Of course this is before any RAID 0 TRIM, but no TRIM should show up as lower write speeds, so it does not make sense. By the time I had four 830's in that array, which was for Windows 7, it was almost one year old.

Notice the nice sequential read scaling on the three drive array, for SATA II at ~250MB/s for one drive, I had three times that at 700MB/s. Also the 64GB 830 would do ~160MB/s sequential write in AS SSD, and three times that is 480MB/s. So the three drive scaling was perfect. That is what you must mean about how good the X58 system is, right Igor? Still only ~20MB/s 4K read, always a weak point of the 830, at least it didn't go down to much!

I must say that I created these arrays by adding one SSD at a time, not by creating them with all the drives at one time, but I did start with one 64GB 830, and kept adding more. That was with the same OS installation, never did a fresh install. The ICH10R uses a DMI buss to communicate with the X58 IOH chip, which has a QPI link to the CPU. Perhaps the ICH10R was the bottleneck, or the need to go through the X58 chip to get to the CPU that seems to slow things down:

http://ark.intel.com/products/41447/Intel-Core-i7-930-Processor-8M-Cache-2_80-GHz-4_80-GTs-Intel-QPI

Maybe the X99 chipset will improve on this, or Z97.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by parsec View Post

Regarding QPI, Haswell CPUs don't have a QPI link, and both Sandy and Ivy Bridge CPUs don't have QPI either. Of course the chipset, or PCH in this case, is what matters, but as rui-no-onna said, all we have is DMI, and now with six SATA III ports on Haswell chipsets, we hit the DMI wall with RAID arrays quickly.
Doesn't the PCIe x16 lane for graphics cards connect to the CPU directly via QPI?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by rui-no-onna View Post

Doesn't the PCIe x16 lane for graphics cards connect to the CPU directly via QPI?
on z67 it is connect with16gb/s but i cant find anything about z77 now.
Hey parsec i understand what you saying and its problably like that ,what make me think X58 is great for raid is this scores:
M4 on sata2:

M4 on sata3:

But probably after three drives things change.
Also i got to say if you use Intel RST to ad drives to RAID field i was never satisfied with that kind of raiding ,results was just disappointing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
953 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rui-no-onna View Post

Doesn't the PCIe x16 lane for graphics cards connect to the CPU directly via QPI?
This is what Intel shows in the Haswell processor datasheet:



We can see the SATA interface connection is ambiguous, the best I can come up with is it uses the DMA (Direct Memory Access) interface, and then via DMI into the CPU. I don't see any reference to QPI in the Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, or Haswell processor datasheets.

The DMI description is:

Only DMI x4 configuration is supported.
• DMI 2.0 support.
• Compliant to Direct Media Interface Second Generation (DMI2).
• Four lanes in each direction.
• 5 GT/s point-to-point DMI interface to PCH is supported.
• Raw bit-rate on the data pins of 5.0 GB/s, resulting in a real bandwidth per pair of 500 MB/s given the 8b/10b encoding used to transmit data across this interface. Does not account for packet overhead and link maintenance.
• Maximum theoretical bandwidth on interface of 2 GB/s in each direction simultaneously, for an aggregate of 4 GB/s when DMI x4.


That is basically what we knew from the start.

The PCI-E interface seems to be directly into the CPU and PCH.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
953 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unit Igor View Post

on z67 it is connect with16gb/s but i cant find anything about z77 now.
Hey parsec i understand what you saying and its problably like that ,what make me think X58 is great for raid is this scores:
M4 on sata2:

M4 on sata3:

But probably after three drives things change.
Also i got to say if you use Intel RST to ad drives to RAID field i was never satisfied with that kind of raiding ,results was just disappointing.
You mean P67, right? If that is actually better bandwidth than Z87, I would be surprised, meaning I was not aware of that.

I loved my ASUS P67 board, which I also used with a pair of M4's, this is from 12/26/2011:



I think that was with IRST 10.8. Those were the days, when the M4 was one of the best SSDs, and good SATA III boards were rare. Sure looks like we haven't come very far increasing the read speeds from that time, at least the 4K read speeds are up by 25% or more on some SSDs. My M4's were never as good on sequential write speeds, or my board caused that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by parsec View Post

You mean P67, right? If that is actually better bandwidth than Z87, I would be surprised, meaning I was not aware of that.

I loved my ASUS P67 board, which I also used with a pair of M4's, this is from 12/26/2011:



I think that was with IRST 10.8. Those were the days, when the M4 was one of the best SSDs, and good SATA III boards were rare. Sure looks like we haven't come very far increasing the read speeds from that time, at least the 4K read speeds are up by 25% or more on some SSDs. My M4's were never as good on sequential write speeds, or my board caused that.
U man my own thread start to confuse me,i am geeeetttttiiiinnnnggg oooolllllddd.
biggrin.gif

I was referring graphic to cpu connection for which stands 16gb/s on 67 but i forget what 67.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
953 Posts
Igor, keep that brain working with PC stuff and you won't be old, that's my trick!!

My first build was a socket 775 Pentium D 845, just retired that system from the family PC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
My first was 775 ,Pentium 4 2,8ghz.
And my first cooler was Titan Vanessa ,look how beautiful she was.And believe she wasn't only dumb blonde ,she was effective like Venomous X:


I still got that screw driver.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top