• Blog
  • About
  • Contact
linkedin
twitter

Blog Post

16
MAR
2005

My RAID Adventure

tag : Hardware
by : Christoph De Baene
comment : 3

Recently I purchased a new computer and I wanted to setup a RAID5 on 4x SATA Western Digital 200GB’s. The motherboard is from Asus, the A8N SLI Deluxe which has 2 SATA controllers, the Silicon Image 3114R and NForce4. I also purchased a WD Raptor as boot disk which is connected to the NVRaid because it supports NCQ and the SI3114R not.

First of all I wanted to test if my raptor was faster than a normal 7200 rpm HD. And thankfully this was the case, it was about 10MB/s faster.

RAPTOR 74GB

7200RPM 200GB

After that I tested some RAID (0, 1, 10) configurations on the SI3114 controller. One thing was clear, that mirroring on the SI3114 isn’t optimized for reading, it’s even a little bit slower than reading from a single disk. This has also been confirmed in a review (images are broken) from xbitlabs, where they also conclude that it doesn’t have any optimizations for mirrored arrays, but focuses on RAID0. As you can see from the benchmarks there is no performance gain in RAID 1 (left below image) against a single disk (right up image), and RAID10 performs like a RAID0.

RAID 1 STRIPE 64

RAID 10 STRIPE 64

So, the SI3114 was not an option for me. Then I looked for setting up a software raid in Windows XP. Yes indeed, you can build a RAID 5 in Windows XP after doing a little hack :-) . For more information check out the article at tomshardware named Using WindowsXP to Make RAID 5 Happen.

Here I did a benchmark with a stripe size of 0.5 (default) and 64K. As you can see this gives a big difference.

RAID 5 STRIPE 0.5

RAID 5 STRIPE 64

From the benchmarks with default stripe size I conclude that the read performance of RAID5 is about the same compared to a single disk, but the write performance is about the half of a single disk. This solution did not satisfy for me, because the performance is not what I expected, consumes CPU and I don’t like the idea that I had to enable it by hacking some DLLs in Windows and there were some issues with Service Pack 2.

Therefore I concluded to buy a PCI-Express SATA Raid controller, namely the Areca 1220. The Areca RAID controllers perform very well and include all the RAID features you need. A very detailed review with a lot of benchmarks can be found here.

The ASUS A8N SLI Deluxe does have 2x 8xPCI-Express ports, which can be used for example for one VGA card and a RAID card, it doesn’t need to be 2 VGA cards. To be sure I sended an email to Asus to ask if the Areca controller is compatible with the motherboard. The Areca stand at CeBIT told me they sended controllers to different manufactors (Asus, MSI, etc.) to test the compatibility and will update the ‘Compatibility list’ on the website.

UPDATE:
Until now it’s not yet possible to combine for example one VGA and one RAID card in an SLI Motherboard, it’s a BIOS issue.
So, I hope getting more news soon :-)

About the Author

Social Share

    3 Comments

    1. Maurice March 23, 2005 at 2:32 pm Log in to Reply

      Please let us know how the Areca works in the Asus SLI. I saw a message thread that suggests that on the DFI Lanparty SLI, the x8 SLI PCI-E slots are only x8 for NVidia video cards. They mentioned that using other cards (such as RAID cards), the second slot only works at x2. The Areca may work, but may be limited to x2 bandwidth.

    2. delarou March 28, 2005 at 8:32 pm Log in to Reply

      I received an answer from Asus and apparently the PCI-Express slots are only meant for VGA cards :( .
      Maybe another motherboard, but I think there is still no motherboard for socket 939 that supports two
      generic PCI-Express slots like the Tyan K8WE. I hope that maybe a BIOS upgrade can fix the problem but
      I doubt it.

    3. Asaf April 16, 2005 at 6:05 pm Log in to Reply

      ASUS claim that your motherboard does have RAID5 controller.
      See http://usa.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=A8N-SLI%20Deluxe&langs=09
      You need to download a software patch. Did you try it ?
      I hope this means that it is a driver fix and it does use hardware functionality.

    Leave a Reply Cancel reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Tag cloud

    .NET SDK Ajax Architecture ASP.NET ASP.NET Web API Code Generation Components Events Forms Hardware Modeling Neo4j Patterns & Practices Personal Roslyn Services Silverlight SQL Server Testing Tools Unity Utils & Tools Virtualization Visual studio Windows Live WPF

    Archive

    • April 2012
    • October 2011
    • August 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • July 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • August 2008
    • March 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • March 2007
    • February 2007
    • January 2007
    • December 2006
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • September 2006
    • August 2006
    • May 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • February 2006
    • January 2006
    • November 2005
    • October 2005
    • September 2005
    • August 2005
    • July 2005
    • June 2005
    • May 2005
    • April 2005
    • March 2005
    • February 2005
    • September 2004
    • July 2004
    • June 2004
    • May 2004
    • April 2004
    • March 2004
      Copyright 2013, Christoph De Baene