ASRock.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > OverClocking(OC) Zone > Achivement&Record
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Two 950's in R0
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Two 950's in R0

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
DooRules View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2015
Location: Newfoundland
Status: Offline
Points: 122
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DooRules Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Two 950's in R0
    Posted: 12 Dec 2015 at 8:37am
My best score to date. Didn't hurt that my chip was at 4.9 Shocked


Back to Top
parsec View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2015
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4996
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote parsec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Dec 2015 at 2:17pm
Nice, nice, nice! Thumbs Up

You didn't lose much 4K random Read speed either compared to a single 950, less than 10%, my usual RAID 0 nitpick. Wink

Being a RAID 0 user veteran, you know how the RAID 0 scaling with SATA SSDs usually goes, particularly with Sequential performance. We don't see that here with the Seq Read speed unfortunately. The write performance looks really good, much better scaling in the sequential and both 4K results, I'd love to see the AS SSD IOPs for that test.

A few questions for you:
  • This is not an OS volume, right?
  • Are you using UEFI version 2.10? IRST 14.6.0.1029?
  • What RAID 0 stripe size was used for this array?
  • If you tried different stripe sizes, how much did they affect performance?
  • What speed is your DRAM memory running at? I've seen a few people claim that memory speed influences benchmark performance. Since the NVMe command queue is in system memory, that may be true. But I wonder how much of a difference it really makes? Of course, so is the AHCI command queue.
  • Have you found the '950 RAID 0 arrays to be "fragile", as I call them? Meaning if you even start the PC into the UEFI with the SATA mode not set to RAID, the array will fail. A UEFI update or clear caused that with the IRST 14.5 driver and Option ROM, with AHCI SM951s in RAID 0.
  • I assume the Windows Write Caching and Buffer Flushing options in Device Manager and the IRST Windows UI are still functional with the 950 RAID 0 array? I ask only because my single Intel 750, or probably the Intel NVMe driver, does not allow Write Caching to be enabled.
My few questions are getting out of hand, so that's all for now! Geek
Back to Top
DooRules View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2015
Location: Newfoundland
Status: Offline
Points: 122
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DooRules Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Dec 2015 at 5:24pm
Hello Parsec.

This is not an OS volume, still just playing with the drives. Big smile

- I am on UEFI 2.1, and for this run I was on 14.6.0.1029.  But they are indistinguishable from 14.8 as far as I can see.

- The stripe size was 128k. I have tried all of them at this point from 4k to 128k. IMHO these drives do better as the stripe size increases. Would love to see the 256k, 512k and 1MB option for an array to try.

- Tried the ram at lower frequencies, 2133 and at XMP 3200, no discernible difference to me. What really does make a difference is chip frequencies. Higher clocked the chip, faster the bench, 1 to 1 ratio on that.

- I did break one array. Not quite sure how i did it. I do suspect it had something to do with my GPU benching though. Once I get to the limit of the cards I end up with system freezes, hard restarts and the like. Smile Gee, who would have guessed, lol.

- All caching options are available yes through the IRST CP for the array, and device manager. 

- I am somewhat baffled as to why the read scales so poorly in comparison the writes. But that gives me something to work on so all good.Wink  another couple days of playing around and then I will put OS on one drive and storage for the second. Ditch all other drives at that point.

ps.. I could use a bios that allows for more than 1.5 Vc Shocked


Edited by DooRules - 12 Dec 2015 at 5:26pm
Back to Top
DooRules View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2015
Location: Newfoundland
Status: Offline
Points: 122
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DooRules Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Dec 2015 at 8:09pm
Used a 60 gb file to see transfer speed between the two 950's , maintained the same speed for full transfer


Back to Top
parsec View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2015
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4996
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote parsec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2015 at 11:12pm
That's great! Thanks for your answers.

A bit odd how it started out slow and then increased like crazy, usually I see the opposite, always dropping off at the end or midway.

I've seen some 950 Pro users say they "feel" no difference between their 950 and good SATA SSDs. My Win 10 cold startup after the POST beep seems almost instant, while my SanDisk Extreme Pros take about three seconds.

Driver and software installation is super fast, and things like copying my Windows installation driver and software collections of ~1.5GB in one folder, to a backup SSD (zero HDDs in my PCs LOL ), is subjectively instant, I don't see the Windows file copy dialog box appear at all.

I think we are seeing the limitations of the Windows file system code, which was designed for HDDs, being at least part of the limitation of perceived and actual performance of all high end SSDs.


Edited by parsec - 14 Dec 2015 at 11:12pm
Back to Top
Xaltar View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2015
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 5885
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Xaltar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2015 at 11:55pm
Originally posted by parsec parsec wrote:

 
I think we are seeing the limitations of the Windows file system code, which was designed for HDDs, being at least part of the limitation of perceived and actual performance of all high end SSDs.

That would make a lot of sense. I have noticed that my indexing/search times seem inordinately slower than most other tasks on my SSDs. Both of which functions utilize a very outdated sequential search method that, while effective on mechanical drives, fail to take advantage of the way an SSD accesses data. I would love to see MS focus more on updating their software to accommodate current tech and less on trying to force everyone to conform to how they want us to use their OS Confused
Back to Top
parsec View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2015
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4996
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote parsec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2015 at 2:15pm
I recall a forum post I read, where the guy was unhappy with the need for the "stupid TRIM" command for SSDs.

TRIM is a work around for the current way something in the Windows file system (NTFS?) was designed when only HDDs, floppy disks, and apparently USB flash drives existed. For HDDs, when files are deleted, all that is done is the space that was used by the files (LBAs) are put on the available list. An HDD happily overwrites itself if told to do so. SSDs, no.

This unseen and unknown quirk of NAND storage that came after magnetic drives, which are the basis for computer storage IO software, is only one of the things that is not optimal for flash storage. It seems to me that the magnetic storage user base in businesses and governments alone will prevent any change to HDD oriented storage system software for quite a while.

Meanwhile, NAND flash storage is evolving (PCIe SSDs, NVMe, M.2), and an apparent successor from Intel/Micron is on the horizon.

Microsocialist's one OS for every device and person will impede progress in a different way. You cannot satisfy all of the people all of the time with one "thing", but if the number of people that are satisfied with that one thing is large enough, the rest of us will be ignored.

The truly first portable PC (smart phones) has become that one thing IMO.

IMO, we are lucky that we (still) have what we have now, and that it works well, if not optimally. Not that I disagree with you Xaltar at all, I don't. I just hope we don't lose it soon.
Back to Top
DooRules View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2015
Location: Newfoundland
Status: Offline
Points: 122
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DooRules Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2015 at 11:41pm

single 950 with OS installed





Throw in a cinebench run




Edited by DooRules - 16 Dec 2015 at 12:23am
Back to Top
Xaltar View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2015
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 5885
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Xaltar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Dec 2015 at 1:43am
Those are some great scores DooRules. Makes me wish I had the budget to pick up a pair of 950s myself. Just out of curiosity, what scores are you getting on your 6700K with the CPUZ bench tool? Since the latest update it seems to be scaling better on multi core tests.

Originally posted by parsec parsec wrote:

IMO, we are lucky that we (still) have what we have now, and that it works well, if not optimally. Not that I disagree with you Xaltar at all, I don't. I just hope we don't lose it soon.

I doubt we will have to worry about it for a long time yet, not with so many people still utilizing mechanical drives for storage. It would be nice to see a new NAND specific file system that takes better advantage of the technology as an option. I know next to nothing about programming and development but I would imagine it would probably be a nightmare to make it play nice with NTFS and FAT32. 

That said, given how fast my system feels using a regular SSD and with so much faster available now it may just be a moot point by the time it were actually ready to roll out. The nerd in me just wants another excuse to geek out. Geek Tongue 
Back to Top
DooRules View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2015
Location: Newfoundland
Status: Offline
Points: 122
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DooRules Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Dec 2015 at 2:37am
First time I have run that bench...


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.06
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 22.305 seconds.