RAID0 Question

[Old Hippie]

I set-up my first RAID venture with 2 80GB Intel G1 units on Wed.

It took awhile but after mumbling, bumbling and finally holding my mouth right, I got 'er done.

It screams nicely but I noticed that it takes @ 15-16 Windows loading "scrolls" in RAID0 when it used to load after 3 or 4 scrolls with a single G1 drive.

This is on an Abit IP-35 Pro using the Intel ICH9R chipset.

I loaded the RAID drivers during the Vista install and assume the extra loading time is the chipset setting up the drives, but is this normal?

I forgot this tid-bit....when the RAID configuration screen is shown there's a notice that says "The AHCI BIOS is not loaded!!".

I'm using the latest Abit BIOS..........

 

[Astral Abyss]

My IP-35 Pro has always displayed that as well.

Try installing the Intel Matrix Storage Manager and turning on Write Back Cache if you haven't already. It'll give you a nice speed boost.

RAID boot-ups do take a bit longer. Perhaps it's not the RAID setup slowing down your boot process, but a different driver? For instance, if I use the Creative X-Fi driver it takes an additional 5-6 seconds to boot vs the generic Microsoft driver.

 

[Old Hippie]

I had the storage manager installed but didn't think about the Write Back feature.

I started playing around with the JMicron storage manager mode which I always leave on IDE. I thought maybe that's what the bitching was about so I changed it to RAID and my machine refused to boot. Since that didn't work out to well rolleyes, I changed it to AHCI and everything went wonky...no boot and told me one of my new drives was faulty.

I ended-up breaking the array to TS the drive problem and it went away.

ATM it's just doing nothing and I'm using my VR.

I appreciate the Write Back tip and thanks for the response!

What I'm thinking here is that an i5 or i7 board might have a little better response to SSD RAID0.

 

[Dangman]

What I'm thinking here is that an i5 or i7 board might have a little better response to SSD RAID0.

IIRC, the ICH10R of the i5/i7 mobos are pretty much 45nm versions of the ICH9R. No real differences AFAIK.

 

[Old Hippie]

IIRC, the ICH10R of the i5/i7 mobos are pretty much 45nm versions of the ICH9R. No real differences AFAIK.

Well poop!

Just thought I'd give a little update here.....

I installed the RAID0 again but this time aligned the drives myself with the Vista install disk and BINGO.........I'm down to 9 or 10 scrolls (1/2 what it was) and things are screaming fast.

It reminds me of when my single drive was a virgin....only faster.

I still get the warning "AHCI BIOS not Installed" on the RAID set-up screen and the Storage manager is in IDE mode but I'm going to put this install in the "Win" column and use it.

Looks like the moral of the story is don't trust your Vista disk to align partitions correctly.

 

[IntelOwnz]

You setup the raid in Windows? lolwut

You understand there's no performance gain when using windows to do the raid right?

 

[Old Hippie]

You setup the raid in Windows? lolwut

Yep, just like most RAID0 users here.

You understand there's no performance gain when using windows to do the raid right?

I'm thinking you otta look around at some SSD RAID0 charts on this site or the internet but in the mean time...put the pipe Down!

 

[Lateralus]

Forgive me (it has been a loong day) but I don't understand what you guys are talking about.

Normally when I set up RAID, I build the array before installing the OS. Then (assuming Vista/7) let the disc perform the alignment/partition tasks and install the OS onto the array, and finally install IMSM after the OS install has completed. Old Hippie, I assume this is what you did the first time...

During the second install, when you say you aligned the drives yourself using the Vista install disc...what did you change that time vs. the first time?

And what is meant by "setting up the RAID in Windows" and "using Windows to do the RAID"? I thought all RAID setup/config had to be done pre-Windows install. What different ways are there to do it and what impacts do they have on performance?

Again, sorry I'm not clear on this. Got woken up way too early (this is my week to be on call) and this thread has lost me. I'd love some clarification for my own personal benefit.

 

[IntelOwnz]

Perhaps I'm confused, are you setting up the raid in the bios using the bridge? Or when you got to the "Where to Install Windows" portion of the setup did you create a raid array there?

Unless there's some new feature in Vista/7, When I tested a Windows Raid Array in XP 32/64bit, there was a less then 1% performance gain in Raid-0 and an increased CPU stress of about 1%, negating any benefit.

Perhaps things have changed? I haven't touched raid in a desktop setting in awhile

 

[Old Hippie]

During the second install, when you say you aligned the drives yourself using the Vista install disc...what did you change that time vs. the first time?

I aligned the drives manually.

Or when you got to the "Where to Install Windows" portion of the setup did you create a raid array there?

I'm definately confused.

I only know one way to create a RAID array within a Windows OS and that's to set the RAID parameters and install windows on that partition.

I have no idea about this "bridge".

If you made your test with SSDs and didn't see a noticeable increase in speeds, your experience doesn't mirror most current conclusions.

 

[Lateralus]

I aligned the drives manually.

Gotcha. I knew about Diskpart; for some reason I was thinking you were somehow able to change the offset during the main install process without using the method you linked to.

It stinks that doing a straight Vista install didn't align the drives properly by default. Everything I've read up until this point has indicated that Vista/7 will properly align your SSD while XP won't. Makes me wonder if this was an isolated case, or if more Vista SSD owners need to go check their offset values to make sure they're what they should be.

 

[Old Hippie]

Makes me wonder if this was an isolated case, or if more Vista SSD owners need to go check their offset values to make sure they're what they should be.

I was thinking the same thing.

The deal is, I've never read another post questioning the increased boot time or slower speeds.

I knew how a single unit performs because I'd been using one for 4 months, therefore I noticed that things weren't quite up to snuff.

If someone didn't have my experience, would they notice that things weren't quite right if replacing a 7200 rpm drive with an SSD?

That type of thinking tells me......I have waaayyy to much time on my hands and maybe it's time to get a J-O-B!!!