0

I recently bought two Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSDs in order to replace an old SSD and build a RAID-0 array on my PC. So, the configuration of the PC is the following:

CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU X 980 @ 3.33GHz  
Motherboard: MSI Big Bang-XPower (MS-7666)  
SATA-II controller: Intel ICH10R (6 ports)  
SATA-III controller: Marvell 88SE9128 (2 ports)  
Memory: 6x Corsair CMT12GX3M3A2000C9 (total 24 GB) DDR3  
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX580 1536MB (EVGA)  

I placed the 2 SSDs on the Marvell controller, set mode to AHCI, created the array using the interface provided and then installed Windows 8.1 Pro x64. After installing Windows I ran the CrystalDiskMark benchmark and the results are:

http://tinypic.com/r/fcmjrl/8

Then I installed Marvell 88SE9128 drivers I found online and run the test again. Here is what I got:

http://tinypic.com/r/rr0fp1/8

I've searched online for similar benchmarks and mine seems too slow. The sequential read doesn't even reach the 2/3 of the max throughput of SATA 3.0 which is 600MB/s. Also, the rest of the tests are very slow. This is a total dissapointment. Is there something I am missing here (old controller, cable, etc)?

The reason I did not install the drivers during the Windows installation is that the installer could not recognize the drivers which I had copied to a USB flash. I don't know if that affects the raid performance permanently.

Thanks.

6
  • those extra chips are always slower compared to native SATA3 ports from the chipset. What you see is expected. Apr 6, 2015 at 6:15
  • Can you be more specific? Are there any other factors I could examine for the existing system? If I build a RAID-0 array on the Intel SATA-2 ports instead will I get better speed?
    – mgus
    Apr 6, 2015 at 16:12
  • no, SATA2 is even slower. To get a higher speed you'll need a newer motherboard with native SATA3 ports Apr 6, 2015 at 16:14
  • 1
    None, that controller is connected to the motherboard using a single PCIE2.0x1 link, which is a max of a half gig a second Apr 30, 2015 at 23:49
  • Also, I think that is connected to the ICH10, not the X58, which means a bandwidth limit if you are using any of the other ICH PCIe connectors, or the SATA ports, or the LAN or audio devices. Apr 30, 2015 at 23:56

1 Answer 1

0

The problem is with the newer Samsung drives using 3D NAND chips. They don;t play well in any array, be it RAID0 or RAID1, as they will get less than 1/2 their speeds compared to being hooked up to a single SATA 6g port.

If you Google Samsung RAID slow performance, you will get many hits with all types of users stating what you have. There are even MAC users with the same issue, where they got 900MB/s with non-Samsung (3D chip) drives, then they switched drives and got terrible numbers. If you take a single Samsung and attached it as a SATA device, you will get 500MB/s. Once you try any type of RAID, even mirroring, the number drop alot.

Look at my other posts, I explain it in more detail, but it is a common Samsung problem, and you are better off NOT using RAID until they fix the issue, either with newer controller, a newer drive, or a Firmware update to allow the drives to run at full speed when in an array. Sorry to bring the bad news, I bought 2 500GB's to stripe and I had to use them as single drives, sadly...

Dave

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .