New setup advice

M

multi_threaded

n00b
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
6
Hello,

I'm looking to get a new storage setup for my workstation, currently i'm running from the IC10HR an 128GB SSD as boot drive and a couple of 1TB hdd's. I also have a very fast 2TB raid 0 array running from the onboard sas controller (lsi 1068E).

I need more storage space and a lot less power consumption my raid 0 array alone is over 100W.

My motherboard doesn't support GPT so i already ordered a raid card that should take care of that issue.

For around 400 usd what's the biggest and fastest setup i could get?
 
I think you have conflicting goals. I mean if you are worried about power usage get rid of all of the drives and buy a single 6TB internal and a single 6TB external (or more than 1 for multiple backups) to backup the internal. Keep the 6TB external off when not doing a backup. Get a larger SSD for performance and get rid of the RAID card that will add 10W+.

My motherboard doesn't support GPT
Click to expand...

I use GPT on my core2quad system at home that is my main htpc server. You just can't boot from it. Not a problem since I boot off of a 256GB ssd.
 
Maybe i didn't explained myself to well my raid 0 array is built with 7 300gb's 15K sas hdd's.

I don't have conflicting goals getting 2 6TB's drives would not fit my budget :) plus it would be slow as hell i'm thinking in getting maybe 3tb's drives in a raid 5 setup.
 
ROFL

The board has a ICHR10 chipset, nothing more to want. Motherboard GPT support, only an issue for idiots who insist on loading an OS to a 2+TB driver of array.

The current chipset will take any drive you like if making a storage array, if your post-BIOS setup for the RAID doesn't like the bigger drives, use the IRST software in the OS.
 
Maybe the ICHR10 is ok for you...It doesn't cut it for me. If i'm going to do a raid 5 array i want hardware raid.

3 TB's have been an issue with this particular motherboard and not only for the "idiots" who tried to used them as boot drives. Just do a search for "hp z800 3tb".
 
Big and fast ARE conflicting goals if the budget is limited. A single 1 TB SSD is probably the best you could do with that money.

A single SSD will blow any mechanical RAID array out of the water, unless you specifically go for sequential speed.
I'd like to suggest an SSD for the performance critical stuff and a large HDD for the data dump.

The main benefit of hardware RAID cards is random write performance, and only if you have a BBU.
 
Sure one SSD is fast but on the crappy ICHR10 it only runs @ half speed...besides i want to expand my storage not reducing it in half. My raid card does have battery backup cache and 6GB/s inteface for SAS drives with sata drives it's only 3gb/s.

Sequential read is fairly important to me...once raid 5.

My current array is a beast if things are cached it just blows your mind :)

xVL3p2Z.png


Problem is 15W X 7 hdd's 105W continuous@idle plus the 2 1TB drives that i have for backup...cutting those 9 drives for 3X3TB's drives would be a significant reduction in power consumption for a machine who works 24/7.
 
Do you really need a sequential throughput this high?

The RAID card's cache does not really matter for reads, if something is in it, there is a good chance it is in the OS page cache, too. And that is much faster and larger.

I don't doubt your numbers, I doubt that you have an application that can make use of them.
I have seen almost zero meaningful scenarios apart from large file copying that benefit from sequential speed more than from random IO.
 
omniscence said:
Do you really need a sequential throughput this high?
Click to expand...
Not really, but i would like to keep it at least around 300mb/s.

omniscence said:
The RAID card's cache does not really matter for reads, if something is in it, there is a good chance it is in the OS page cache, too. And that is much faster and larger.
Click to expand...

You are correct, i've bought a new raid card but i didn't install it yet...i'm running this array from the onboard sas controller (lsi 1068e) and that one doesn't have any cache i was referring to files being cached by the os.

omniscence said:
I don't doubt your numbers, I doubt that you have an application that can make use of them.
I have seen almost zero meaningful scenarios apart from large file copying that benefit from sequential speed more than from random IO.
Click to expand...

I do have some stuff going that sometimes i can see it stretch it's legs to full speed...but mostly you are correct random IO should yield better real life gains.
 
Dude, sounds a little like there is some "Having your cake and eating it too" along with "Mixing ambitions with capabilities".

The on-board ICH10R would see roughly single drive write speeds but reads would be RAID-0 like across the array, easily smashing your older SAS.
A quartet of RAID-0 SSD's on even SATA-II will still come in at 1.2GB/sec R/W all day long, use a RAID-5 array or JBOD for backing up.

You haven't supplied much detail and keep being obscure with what you have provided which leads to my opinion stated in the first paragraph.

Supply ALL the info like drives, main-board, RAID controllers, OS and the reason for the speed-need.
 
Lost-Benji said:
The on-board ICH10R would see roughly single drive write speeds but reads would be RAID-0 like across the array, easily smashing your older SAS. .
Click to expand...

You cant be serious :D
Please share with us your raid 5 results with the ICH10R...it doesn't take much to realize that it has the worst raid 5 performance ever....actually a quick google search would have enlightened you about how bad it really is.

Lost-Benji said:
A quartet of RAID-0 SSD's on even SATA-II will still come in at 1.2GB/sec R/W all day long, use a RAID-5 array or JBOD for backing up.
Click to expand...

It doesn't even get's 700mb/s...you have no idea what you are talking about :rolleyes:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ich10r-sb750-780a,2374-12.html

4 SSD's plus a raid-5 for backup for 400$?!
 
multi_threaded said:
For around 400 usd what's the biggest and fastest setup i could get?
Click to expand...

You can get four of these and RAID them with the controller you bought.

http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-MX100-2-5-Inch-Internal-CT256MX100SSD1/dp/B00KFAGCWK

I condone that would be about the biggest and the fastest you can get for that much. I'm not sure what you're trying to do though. The numbers you have shown didn't blow my mind or anything as they're all HDD's, and my dual SSD RAID0 array blows that setup out of the water in terms of performance.

You need to explain exactly what you want to do with the new drives you want to buy, as was told in the previous post, in order to get sound advice.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
multi_threaded said:
You cant be serious :D
Please share with us your raid 5 results with the ICH10R...it doesn't take much to realize that it has the worst raid 5 performance ever....actually a quick google search would have enlightened you about how bad it really is.



It doesn't even get's 700mb/s...you have no idea what you are talking about :rolleyes:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ich10r-sb750-780a,2374-12.html

4 SSD's plus a raid-5 for backup for 400$?!
Click to expand...

What ever fool, I know what I ran for years, I know what they did in speeds, I don't need to prove nothing to you. I would love to show you that your figures are bullshit, sadly, I have no boards anymore with 10R's. I do however run a H97 in my WS, here is an apple for you to chew on:

4x WD 2TB Blacks in RAID-5 using Intel onboard RAID. Writes look pretty F...en good to me.

If you can't get the speeds, maybe you need to step back and realise, there is a good chance you are the problem, not the board/chipset.

But hey, you still choose to be a tosser and can't be honest or clear with you info so feel free to go forth and multiply with thy self.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top