P-6831FX Raid Question

Hi All,

My 250 5400RPM drive start failing so I just went ahead and bought two 200GB 7200RPM Hitachi drives and installed them with RAID 0. My question is when you installed raid what IDE drivers does it show in your device manager? The reason I ask is because the SATA controler is no longer showing up and only an ULTRA ATA driver is there. Is this normal under RAID? I just want to make sure I am not missing a driver. When using RAID do we need to install the Intel® Matrix Storage Manager?

Also, does anyone know a way to see the HD temperatures while in RAID mode. Apparently none of the tools I tried will bypass the raid such as HD TUNE, HDMonitor, etc. Even a DOS/Bootable Linux tool would be handy.

Third, what speeds are you getting with HD TUNE. Specifically anyone else with 2 200GB 7200RPM drives. Also if you only have one of the Hitachi and/or not doing RAID, what HD TUNE speeds are you getting? I am concerned because my MAX is 98MB/sec but I saw someone with two 250GB 5400 RPM drives getting a MAX of 107MB. This does not make sense as I would think two 7200RPM RAID should be faster than a two 5400RPM RAID array.

Edited to include a link to download the free HDTUNE: http://www.hdtune.com/

Thanks all!

 

As soon as I get home this evening, I will bench my two Hitachi 7200 RPMs in RAID 0 for you and let you know.

Good idea on adding the link.

Additionally, what stripe size did you go with? The size of the stripe has an impact on overall transfer rates. Not a HUGE difference, but it is one that you can measure.

 

Hey bud,

I woke the computer up from a sleep state that I have been putting it in for the last couple of days, installed HD Tune 2.55, and pressed start. 118.6 MB/sec was my max. I am going to give it a couple more tries.

 

Here's my 2 cents...

My max is 107.1, and that's with 2 WD 5400RPM 250s in RAID 0. In a subsequent test, I hit 112 max, but the 107.1 was run after waking up from a 1 hour nap.

b

 

For stripe size I used the default of 128 (I think). What size should I use and what is the advantage of using a smaller stripe size?

Sorry for being such a newbie to RAID.

And have you guys been able to see the HD Temperature while in RAID?

 

See that is what I do not understand. My two hitachi 7200rpm are maxing at 98MB/sec but I am using the 1.83 processor. What processor is in your machine. I wonder if that has anything to do with why mine is note benching as fast as I think it should. BTW, this is basically on a fresh install of Vista.

 

Just to update. If I go into HDTUNE options and change the block size to 128, I get over 133MB/sec. What block size is yours set at? Mine defaulted to 64kb but it was only doing a max of 98mbs/sec.

 

Interesting. When I first went with RAID, I used 128kb. But decided to try out 64kb, so that's what I'm on right now. To me, and this is completely based on just what I perceive, 64kb seems quicker. I don't have numbers to back that up, but I'm going to stick with 64kb. Other than the second HD, everything on my machine is stock.

What kind of average throughput are you getting in HDTune?

 

For a better overall balance of use, 32Kb to 64Kb stripes are best. This is more than likely why your computer feels quicker. For overall use it will be quicker and much better to use a smaller stripe in the area of 32 to 64. The decision on what stripe size to use should be determined on what type/size of files you work with and how fast your drives can read/write/access files.

Even though the Hitachi 7200 RPM laptop drives are extremely fast as far as laptops are concerned, they are actually nothing compared to a good majority of the latest desktop 3.5 inch drives. The more recent models of the RAPTOR desktop drives could eat up some 128 or larger stripes depending on what type/size files are being written and read, but I think it is a bit much for 7200 RPM notebook drives.

For general office applications and overall Windows use, smaller stripes will be faster. If you wrote (saved) a file that was 63Kb in size and your RAID 0 utilized a 32Kb stripe, that file would be read (opened) by the two hard drives at the same time. However if you used a 128Kb stripe, it would only be read back to you by one drive because the original 63Kb file would have only been written (saved) to one drive since it did not hit the 128Kb dividing point to split it at 128 and send the other half to the second drive.

There are a bunch a factors that play into determining the perfect stripe, but the bottom line is there will be no perfect stripe for everything. All you can do is determine what you do most or what is most important to you and set a stripe based on that realizing that you will sacrifice in other areas.

If you spend the majority of time with general Office and Windows tasks, stay small (32-64). If you are constantly moving and working with HUGE files than go big. Most people don't spend as much time working constantly with these massive files as they think they do or will and shouldn't use too huge of a stripe. Doing so can end up impacting their overall office/windows productivity.

 

done12many2,

Excellent post. Bump on the rep...

 

I am at 128kb right now, would I be better off going to a smaller strip? I use my laptop for gameing, email, internet.

 

With the intel matrix controller it's been shown (on desktops) that using 128 stripe size produces the best results. No one is entirely sure why, but if you search standard overclocking forums you'll find threads about stripe size.

You should be getting over 100 since that's what 250 5400's are getting. Also make sure you have write caching enabled in the intel storage matrix controller.

 

I also have a P-171x fx with 2 200gb 7200rpm in raid 0, I set it up strip size 128, is there a big difference between 128 and 32 in this setup? How do I setup Write caching in the intel storage matrix controller? Though device manager?

 

A great deal on WD 250 5400rpm HD Passport $89.99 (3 remaining)

http://www.ecost.com/detail.aspx?edp=39390587&source=EWB0416082EML

 

Please report any abnormal temps. I haven't made the effort to RAID as my drives run normally 42-51C depending on use. The second drive hit 58C after a long format! 60C max for WD drives and 55C max for Hitachi

I'm down in New Orleans so it's not the coldest climate around. Gateway said this is normal!??!..and one reason I have issues with GW retail support.

It's odd that HD tune will not report RAID temps. The RAID drivers must block the sensors or HD tune tries to read from BIOS which may be blocked under RAID.

TIA

 

Just a quick question, didn't think I should start a completely new thread for this but I've always wondered, when you set up a RAID array, what usable disc capacity do you get? The sum of both drives, or just one unit capacity?

e.g. Two 200 GB drives in RAID 0 = 400 GB of storage or 200 GB of storage?

 

You will get 400gb with 2 200gb in raid 0

 

Almost every currently produced and most older 7200 RPM Desktop drives will read and write data faster than the 7200 RPM Laptop drives. In this case, I could see the bigger 128 Kb stripe maybe being a little better. I use it for my Raptors in my desktop.

But for my RAID 0 with my 7200 RPM notebook drives, I opted for a much smaller stipe and it is working out better for me.

 

If I change mine from 128 to 32 will I beable to backup my drive then put it back, or is a fresh install in my future?

 

Go into the Storage Matrix. Right Click on your RAID and select to enable the write-cache. I have a attached a screen shot.

 

Thanks, I checked it after I installed Intel storage matrix controller, and it was already enabled.

 

Thank you, I installed the intel storage matrix controller, and write-cache was already enabled.

 

I enabled write cache about 30 minutes ago. My week old WD 250 is now dead. Hmmm.

[edit] I right clicked on the volume in Intel Stoarge mgr and selected 'set as normal.' Hopefully ths prob is not too serious. Thankfully I keep a Mac in the house for important stuff. The 6831fx is just my gaming rig.

 

I just went back to two drives none raid for now. It bugged me too much to not being able to read temperatures. I might switch back to raid later though. Having two seperate drives does come in handy with ghosting partition images, etc.