ASRock.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Technical Support > Intel Motherboards
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - SM951 as OS boot device information
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

SM951 as OS boot device information

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 20>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
eComposer View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2016
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eComposer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jan 2017 at 10:28am
Hello parsec:


I changed the bios to disable CPU overclocking and set the RAM back to default removing XMP 2. Below is the much better performance results:

Seq Q32T1 Read 3313, Write 2384
4K Q32T1   Read 531.3 Write 390.2
Seq Read 3337 Write 2341
4K Read 43.01 Write 135.1

Do you know much about optimal BIOS settings, and the effects of overclocking CPU and using XMP 2 for the RAM settings?

I'm also unable to locate any information on the IRST utility you mentioned, so am unable to change the SSD caching as you suggested. I can't find the software of any documentation on how to do this. I'd appreciate knowing how to install/access this utility you mention, and pointers to any documentation you know about.

Greatly appreciate your help!
Back to Top
eComposer View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2016
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eComposer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jan 2017 at 1:25pm
parsec,

Thank you so much for sharing your experience and perspectives.  You are right, trial and error "in the field of battle" is certainly a teacher.  Consider this my first "blooding"... LOL :)

I followed your advice and I used the 128 stripe size, so wondering what else is involved.  Yes, correct, they are the 250 version.

I'm looking for performance, so seeing a "Reduction" in performance using RAID 0 for an approach that is so fragile and prone to failure (like the high risk plethora of possible events that can kill the PCIe RAID 0) , plus it is a pain to resurrect, just isn't worth the trouble.  The performance benefit would need to be much more than just a marginal increase.

In this case the performance is so substandard this has convinced me that at this point in time the necessary drivers etc don't exist to justify the RAID 0 approach at all.

So, given that if I understand correctly, that a single 960 Evo SSD will outperform the RAID 0 approach, I'm wondering how well cloning the operating system using acronis would be, firstly to a SATA SSD, then back to one of the 960 Evo M.2 SSDs?

I'm guessing a lot of my software licensing could take a hit from this (again - already in heated arguments with some of the more intransigent software companies).

Maybe uninstall the lot and start from square one?  At least we tried this out, it was worth the effort to find out.  You did say at the outset a single SSD was the way to go.  "Nothing ventured, nothing gained".  I will chalk this up to experience, and hopefully others can take note of this.

I must say though that I'm disappointed with the "big guns" for not addressing this sufficiently when obviously users like you and I and others reading this WANT to use this technology to the maximum. 

I'm left with the sense Intel has underperformed here, and Samsung has too.  Samsung has so little support and documentation for what clearly is the new "Gold Rush" given their new 960 range had to be pre-ordered, and from what I see on Amazon, these were the "best seller" for preorders...  Says a lot.

ASRock too having the video on using three M.2 slots sold me on the idea of doing the RAID 0 setup, and really they should make the effort to clarify exactly the things you're saying.

I know this is now for the "Consumer PC" market the "cutting edge", so understand there is still come catch-up.  However, having existed in the enterprise space for a long time across platforms, I wonder if to wouldn't make more sense to get a commercial server instead, and perhaps run VMware with virtualized desktops or something like that to circumvent all these issues.  Bit more money I know, but maybe the better way to go if you understand the System x virtualizationspace...??? 

I'm at that point where it seems to make sense to abandon this RAID 0 PCIe experiment from a practical standpoint. The available time I had is gone, and now it's time to be doing the things this exercise was aiming to enable.  :)

Once again, thank you very much for your seasoned perspectives, it is greatly appreciated.
Back to Top
parsec View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2015
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote parsec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jan 2017 at 11:27am
Originally posted by eComposer eComposer wrote:

Parsec:

Look at this disappointing RAID 0 performance for the two RAID 0 960 Evo SSDs:

Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) :  1791.183 MB/s
  Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) :  1560.562 MB/s
  Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   601.617 MB/s [146879.2 IOPS]
 Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   445.122 MB/s [108672.4 IOPS]
         Sequential Read (T= 1) :  1748.861 MB/s
        Sequential Write (T= 1) :  1314.590 MB/s
   Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) :    44.066 MB/s [ 10758.3 IOPS]
  Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) :   126.434 MB/s [ 30867.7 IOPS]

  Test : 4096 MiB [C: 11.7% (54.4/465.2 GiB)] (x3)  [Interval=5 sec]
  Date : 2017/01/06 16:04:11
    OS : Windows 10  [10.0 Build 14393] (x64)

Seriously, there must be something wrong with this, given others are getting way better performance from a single drive.  You did suggest a single drive would perform better.  Maybe I should start over and remove the Array and clone the OS onto a single drive.

By the way, it's bizarre, but I cannot install the NVMe driver - the driver software just doesn't see the array at all...  not sure if that's part of this too.  :(  lol

Thoughts?


I can tell you (probably) why you have such poor performance. What RAID 0 stripe size did you use?

I believe you said you were using a 64K stripe? Or did you use the default 16K stripe size? As I recall, the TweakTown suggestion for the 64K stripe was for SATA RAID 0 arrays, although I may have missed the article you are referring to. Your performance with two 960 EVOs is less than a single drive, as I imagine you know. BTW, what capacity are each 960 EVO you have? It looks like the 250GB model.

When using the IRST RAID driver for a RAID array of PCIe NVMe SSDs, you don't need to, and cannot, install the NVMe driver. Two reasons for that, only one really counts. The IRST RAID driver acts as the NVMe driver for a RAID array of PCIe NVMe SSDs, so no need to install an NVMe driver. Second, the Samsung software cannot recognize their own drives when in a RAID array, same thing is true for the Magician software. I cannot install the Samsung NVMe driver either, that's normal and not the problem. An NVMe driver is not needed in this case.

I've been holding out on you, and being a hypocrite, as you shall see. Given all the (apparent) problems installing Samsung 960 drives (not only you) I became worried Samsung changed something that was the cause. So I was inspired, and had to see for myself. Yesterday, two 500GB 960 EVOs arrived at my door. I installed Windows 10 on a RAID 0 array of the two 960 EVOs, no problem at all. Of course I have experience doing this, a huge help. I used the 128K stripe size.

I ran ATTO, which I usually do not use, but did so to compare with others using 960 EVOs with ATTO. This is my result:



On the far right side of the bar graph, the Write and Read columns have a numeric value for each row of the bar graph. The maximum read speed is 3.638454GB/s at 128KB file size, the maximum write is 3.122887GB/s at the 4MB file size.

Ran a Crystal for you, to compare.



You can see the Intel RAID software, or possibly the limitation of the chipset, hits a wall at ~3.5GB/s for the large file sequential read speed. So we get virtually no RAID 0 scaling of performance with a SSD that is already at 3GB/s+ read speed.

We do see nice performance scaling for the write speed, doubled from the specs for this SSD, even at the 32KB file size. I was hoping the IRST version 15 software had improved the read performance, over the IRST version 14 software, the initial version that supports PCIe NVMe SSDs in RAID.

I'm a hypocrite, because I'll say that after the Windows installation, installing drivers and software was so fast, I was surprised. The fastest I've ever experienced. Yes, I'm using a Z270 board, which makes NO difference compared to a Z170 board. BTW, do you know what board Samsung used for their performance specifications of the 960 series SSDs? The ASRock Z170 Extreme7+. Thumbs Up

Sorry to say, you cannot change the stripe size of the RAID 0 array, without creating it again. Which means destroying your OS installation when you delete the RAID array, the only way to do it.

What is wrong on your side? Did you install the IRST 15.2 F6 driver during the installation? I did. Do you have any SATA SSDs on the SATA ports shared with the M.2 slots? They should be ignored AFAIK, but I've never tested that myself. I hate to say I told you so, but if you don't use the 128K stripe size, you get what you got. It was like that with IRST version 14, and no change with IRST 15.

Also, you need to configure the Cache mode of the RAID array, which is Off/disabled by default. Sorry, but this will NOT 100% fix your situation, it will improve it IF you are using the 64K stripe size. I'm using the Write back option. You can only configure the Cache mode if you have the IRST Windows utility installed.

WARNING!!!
You MUST, MUST have at least one SATA drive connected to one of the available SATA ports BEFORE you attempt to install the IRST Windows software. If you don't the installation will freeze about 2/3 of the way through it, and if it does complete, it will say an unknown error occurred. The IRST Windows program will NOT run in that situation. You can't fix it by adding a SATA drive after the fact. At least it never worked for me.

Can you understand now why I am reluctant for those not familiar with the Intel RAID software and configurations, to use it for the first time with PCIe NVMe SSDs? I spent days playing with RAID 0 arrays of Samsung 950 Pros before I even dared to try installing an OS on one for the first time. And I've used the IRST software with SATA drives for years. How many times did I install Windows on a RAID 0 array of 950 Pros before I was happy with it? At least three times. But I'm trying to deal with people who have never even installed Windows on a single PCIe NVMe SSD, much less a RAID 0 array of NVMe SSDs. Sorry for my rant, but it's not easy. Everything I know was learned by trial and error, and believe me, there were plenty of errors.








Back to Top
eComposer View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2016
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eComposer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jan 2017 at 8:11am
Parsec:

Look at this disappointing RAID 0 performance for the two RAID 0 960 Evo SSDs:

Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) :  1791.183 MB/s
  Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) :  1560.562 MB/s
  Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   601.617 MB/s [146879.2 IOPS]
 Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   445.122 MB/s [108672.4 IOPS]
         Sequential Read (T= 1) :  1748.861 MB/s
        Sequential Write (T= 1) :  1314.590 MB/s
   Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) :    44.066 MB/s [ 10758.3 IOPS]
  Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) :   126.434 MB/s [ 30867.7 IOPS]

  Test : 4096 MiB [C: 11.7% (54.4/465.2 GiB)] (x3)  [Interval=5 sec]
  Date : 2017/01/06 16:04:11
    OS : Windows 10  [10.0 Build 14393] (x64)

Seriously, there must be something wrong with this, given others are getting way better performance from a single drive.  You did suggest a single drive would perform better.  Maybe I should start over and remove the Array and clone the OS onto a single drive.

By the way, it's bizarre, but I cannot install the NVMe driver - the driver software just doesn't see the array at all...  not sure if that's part of this too.  :(  lol

Thoughts?
Back to Top
eComposer View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2016
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eComposer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jan 2017 at 4:47am
With some help from Parsec, the Samsung 960 Evo PCIe 3 x4 M 2 SSDs deployed in RAID 0 and Windows 10 64 was successfully installed.

For those trying to do this, a key thing to note parsec outlined is that you may need to clear CMOS for each attempt if you can't install windows successfully the first time.  Also, you can't change from RAID mode in BIOS from what I understand, or you will have to start from scratch.

Also, key points not listed in some of the documentation is that you need to boot the Windows install USB selecting the UEFI boot option (F11 at start to select the boot option).  Also, a second USB is needed with the appropriate Intel RAID drivers which need to be searched for and installed at the start of the windows installation.  Parsec outlined this process in detail.
Back to Top
eComposer View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2016
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eComposer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Dec 2016 at 5:58pm
So, why is it NOT possible to install windows 10 64 bit on RAID0 using the new Samsung 960 Evo SSDs in an ASRock Z170 Extreme 7+???

I found this youtube video to be useful as a reference, but as outlined in another thread, I've followed all the necessary steps to set up RAID0 but can never get the RAID volume to appear to install windows 10 64 bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4m2bNOp9BQ

Do any of the other Motherboard brands allow the Samsung Evo 960 SSDs to be set up in RAID0 utilizing the Pcie 3 x4 capability?

The glaring lack of ASRock documentation in this area is not helpful.  There is a lot of confusion over using the "right" Intel RST drivers etc too.  I wish there was a straight forward, easy to search ASRock document outlining the best practices, and providing detailed steps etc.  If there is one, it's really well hidden.
Back to Top
defcon_1 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 17 Nov 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 2
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote defcon_1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Nov 2016 at 3:33am
Originally posted by parsec parsec wrote:


First of all, do you know if you SM951 is the NMVe version, or the AHCI version. There are two versions.

The NVMe version's general model name is MZVPVxxx0. NVMe model is MZ V...

The AHCI version's general model name is MZ-HPVxxx0. AHCI model is MZ H...

This really does not make much of a difference, but is worth knowing.

It's MZVPV (I checked before buying and also on the label when I received it)

Originally posted by parsec parsec wrote:


Next, what M.2 to PCIe adapter are you using? I assume you are using the PCIE2 or PCIE3 slot, since those are the only ones that would work.

< ="text/">

Slotted into the PCIE3 slot.

Originally posted by parsec parsec wrote:


You said the SM951 is recognized in System Browser. What does it say the device it recognizes is?

It looks like this:


Originally posted by parsec parsec wrote:


Given your description, your USB Win 10 installation media was not done correctly. I have no idea why your installation media, "... is on a USB drive formatted in the GPT drive format". I never had that in my guide. I know, you got that from another guide.

Users get the GPT thing mixed up all the time, so I assume that is what happened here. The Windows Creation Tool does not know what drive you are installing on, and I never let it create the USB flash drive. Sorry to say, but that was the mistake you made.

We have some cleanup of the USB flash drive to do. Also, if your flash drive is larger than 16GB, they tend to not work correctly. An 8GB flash drive is big enough, 16GB is what I happen to use.

I have to admit, I hadn't heard much about the GPT thing either but having read somewhere apparently it was better to have the partition set up as GPT rather than MBR. Also using Rufus it offers this option:

Originally posted by parsec parsec wrote:


Finally, click Next to actually start the installation. Should go pretty fast.

When the PC restarts, do NOT go into the UEFI and do NOT remove the USB flash drive until Windows is finished installing and you are looking at the Win 10 desktop. Done.

If you have more problems, let us know, but I can't spoon feed this any more than that. Wink

Thanks for the guide! I followed every step apart from formatting at 32gb because the card (and only card I have) is 64GB so it wouldn't format in 32GB due to the FAT32 filesystem (obviously) so I had to create a new partition 30GB large and followed the rest of the installation...

I don't get 5 new partitions though, only 4 but assume this is also right.

Will post an update once it's complete.
FYI - I do already get to this point, the problem is once it's installed BIOS doesn't seem to pick up the 'Windows Boot Loader' so hence is never able to boot. But will let you know soon if it has worked.
Also, how do I do a UEFI/BIOS clear if it still doesn't work?

UPDATE: Same issue, no Windows Boot Loader option in the Boot options after installing. Will see if I can get hold of another USB drive but strange that it could be the USB that is the problem as the entire installation is flawless. I personally think it is the motherboard not detecting the Boot Loader though have no idea where to even begin fixing that if that is the issue Cry

UPDATE 2: Ok, found another USB drive and performed the same instructions as above to get the ISO on there to boot. Also reset the CMOS (jumper 2-3 to clear) for good measure and I'm gettng the same result..
This leads me to believe the motherboard is the problem here? I'm pretty sure the installation is correct but the motherboard is just not detecting the Windows Boot Loader for some reason Angry

Any further help would be appreciated as I'm very close to just buying a new motherboard at this point...


Edited by defcon_1 - 18 Nov 2016 at 5:48am
Back to Top
parsec View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2015
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote parsec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Nov 2016 at 11:51am
Originally posted by defcon_1 defcon_1 wrote:

Hi all,

I've now spent a good few hours researching and trying to get this working on my PC for a while now but whatever I do results in the same thing: The SM951 drive is not bootable even after installing Windows 10.

I've followed all of the guides, setting the Launch Storage OpROM Policy to UEFI only. I've checked to see that the motherboard picks up the device in the System Browser, so all is fine there however in the Boot Options the only options I have are:
UEFI: Mass Storage Device 1.00 (this is the USB drive I used to install Windows)
USB: Generic STORAGE DEVICE 945

The second one is the SM951 NVMe SSD (not sure why it comes up as USB when it's plugged into a PCIe adapter into the PCIe slot) but when I boot with this device all I get is:
"Reboot and Select proper Boot device
or Insert Boot Media in selected Boot device and press a key_"

According to this guide: http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1236&PN=1&title=how-to-install-windows-on-a-pcie-ssd
I'm supposed to get the option:
 "Windows Boot Loader" or "Windows Boot Loader: <SSD name>"
But I don't.

For the Windows installation, it is on a USB drive formatted in the GPT drive format (I did it this way after following another guide after the Windows Creation tool gave the same result) and I have updated to the 2.90M BIOS from the ASRock website under Beta. Also tried the BIOS update that was posted on this thread...
My motherboard is the z77 Extreme4.

Please help!

Thanks



First of all, do you know if you SM951 is the NMVe version, or the AHCI version. There are two versions.

The NVMe version's general model name is MZVPVxxx0. NVMe model is MZ V...

The AHCI version's general model name is MZ-HPVxxx0. AHCI model is MZ H...

This really does not make much of a difference, but is worth knowing.

Next, what M.2 to PCIe adapter are you using? I assume you are using the PCIE2 or PCIE3 slot, since those are the only ones that would work.

You said the SM951 is recognized in System Browser. What does it say the device it recognizes is?

I've installed Windows 10 on an Intel 750 NVMe SSD on my Z77 Extreme4 board, and it worked fine. But I always had a problem with the Beta P2.90M UEFI version, once Win 10 was installed. I cannot get into the UEFI without doing a UEFI/BIOS clear. I assume a side affect of even getting NVMe support on a Z77 board, which is amazing period.

Given your description, your USB Win 10 installation media was not done correctly. I have no idea why your installation media, "... is on a USB drive formatted in the GPT drive format". I never had that in my guide. I know, you got that from another guide.

Users get the GPT thing mixed up all the time, so I assume that is what happened here. The Windows Creation Tool does not know what drive you are installing on, and I never let it create the USB flash drive. Sorry to say, but that was the mistake you made.

We have some cleanup of the USB flash drive to do. Also, if your flash drive is larger than 16GB, they tend to not work correctly. An 8GB flash drive is big enough, 16GB is what I happen to use.

Quick Censored guide for you, since you seem to know most of what is required. Only change the following in you installation procedure:

Do you have a download Win 10 ISO file somewhere? Or did you just use the Create USB flash drive with the Windows tool when the download was complete, which you said you did. If you don't have the ISO file by itself, you get to download it again, but do NOT use the Windows tool to create the USB flash drive Win 10 installer. Skip that part at the end of the Win 10 ISO download procedure, and you'll have the ISO file in whatever your browser's download folder is.

Once you have a Win 10 ISO file, we can fix your USB flash drive and start over. Put the USB flash drive in a USB 2.0 port on whatever PC you can use, and start a Windows Command Prompt (Admin).

When you see the C:\Windows\system32>  prompt, type in diskpart and press Enter.

Type in list disk and press Enter.

Find the USB flash drive in the list of drives, and find its Disk number. Let's say it is Disk 3.

Type in the following commands one at a time, and press Enter after each one"

select disk 3  (USB flash drive)

detail disk (this is to verify that you selected the correct disk before using "clean" below. Clean formats the drive without checking if it is safe to do so, so be VERY sure it is the USB flash drive!!)

clean


create partition primary


format fs=fat32 quick


active


assign


list volume

exit

You can close the Command Prompt window. The USB flash drive is now in the correct format to accept the Win 10 ISO. Nothing more needs to be done to it, except you could give it a name if you open its Properties.

With that USB flash drive in the PC with the Win 10 ISO file, go to the ISO file.

Left click on the ISO and in the list displayed select Mount.

You'll then see the actual list of files and folders in the ISO file, boot, efi, sources,... setup.

Right click and select all the folders and files so they are all highlighted, similar to a drag and drop selection.

Left click in the highlighted area and find Send To, the USB flash drive should be in the list. Select it and it will take several minutes to write the ~3.7GB to the USB flash drive. When that is done, the USB flash drive with Win 10 is ready to use.

You'll probably find the "Mounted" ISO file as a device with a drive letter in Windows Explorer. Left click on it and select Unmount to get rid of that.

Now put the USB flash drive in a USB 2.0 port on the Z77 Extreme4 board, that I hope ONLY has the SM951 in it, NO OTHER drives, besides the flash drive.

Start that PC, go into the UEFI and select the, "UEFI: <USB flash drive name> to boot from, and Save and Exit to start the installation.

Do NOT select an Express Installation, select a Custom Installation.

The SM951 should be recognized by the Win 10 installer. Delete ANY and ALL partitions on the SM951, it MUST be completely unformatted.

Then click on the New button to format the SM951. You'll see a message about creating partitions, just click OK to continue. You should get five partitions on the SM951, that is correct.

Finally, click Next to actually start the installation. Should go pretty fast.

When the PC restarts, do NOT go into the UEFI and do NOT remove the USB flash drive until Windows is finished installing and you are looking at the Win 10 desktop. Done.

If you have more problems, let us know, but I can't spoon feed this any more than that. Wink








Back to Top
defcon_1 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 17 Nov 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 2
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote defcon_1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Nov 2016 at 2:02am
Hi all,

I've now spent a good few hours researching and trying to get this working on my PC for a while now but whatever I do results in the same thing: The SM951 drive is not bootable even after installing Windows 10.

I've followed all of the guides, setting the Launch Storage OpROM Policy to UEFI only. I've checked to see that the motherboard picks up the device in the System Browser, so all is fine there however in the Boot Options the only options I have are:
UEFI: Mass Storage Device 1.00 (this is the USB drive I used to install Windows)
USB: Generic STORAGE DEVICE 945

The second one is the SM951 NVMe SSD (not sure why it comes up as USB when it's plugged into a PCIe adapter into the PCIe slot) but when I boot with this device all I get is:
"Reboot and Select proper Boot device
or Insert Boot Media in selected Boot device and press a key_"

According to this guide: http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1236&PN=1&title=how-to-install-windows-on-a-pcie-ssd
I'm supposed to get the option:
 "Windows Boot Loader" or "Windows Boot Loader: <SSD name>"
But I don't.

For the Windows installation, it is on a USB drive formatted in the GPT drive format (I did it this way after following another guide after the Windows Creation tool gave the same result) and I have updated to the 2.90M BIOS from the ASRock website under Beta. Also tried the BIOS update that was posted on this thread...
My motherboard is the z77 Extreme4.

Please help!

Thanks

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

Joined: 04 May 2015
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote parsec Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2016 at 12:21pm
Originally posted by ReRoR ReRoR wrote:

Hey parsec,

Although some sites include RAPID mode in their results, and it may be considered cheating the benchmarks, if they specified the hardware platform, and that RAM caching is enabled, it may have some actual purpose for users, and could also be a real way to fetch some awesome performance gains for gaming and applications, with much lower outlay on technology.

Would you mind kindly sharing a few of those links for me to have a look at closer? Thanks!

I am particularly looking to exploit this using an outdated X99 chipset for a build, and it's quad channel memory, as you can see why;
  • Z170 - Bus speed: 8 GT/s DMI3 | Dual Channel DDR4 memory (Max theoretical bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s limited by CPU)
  • X99 Bus speed: 5 GT/s DMI2 | Quad channel DDR4 memory (Max theoretical bandwidth of 68 GB/s limited by CPU)
There are also 3rd party applications that perform similarly to Samsung's RAPID, that may be introducing the ability to define what specific information is cached, as opposed to a straight bit level cache everything, which would further add merit and purpose to the use of RAM caching.


A few of those links? The only one I recall is HWBOT:

http://hwbot.org/

How is X99 outdated? You can use PCIe NVMe SSD directly on the PCIe 3.0 lanes from the CPU, rather than the DMI3 lanes from the chipset. Is DMI3 faster? No.

Sure RAM caching or a RAM drive like ASRock's XFast RAM, is faster than any SSD. DDR3 and DDR4 memory is faster than NAND storage, nothing new there. They've been around for years, so why aren't they more commonly used?

RAM caching and RAM drives are not permanent storage. Remove power from the PC, and their contents is gone. Or if configured right, written to a SSD or HDD, at the speed of those devices, when the PC is shutdown. But if a power loss occurs, any data in a RAM cache or RAM drive is lost. RAPID has the same limitation.

My complaint about RAPID is some people seem to believe it is the SSD providing those speeds, when it absolutely is not. If you were bench marking SSDs as a hobby, would you want your efforts compared to RAM drives or a drive using a RAM cache?

The only data stored in RAPID's RAM cache is new data "written" to the RAPID enabled SSD. That data is written to the RAM cache, and then written to the SSD. If you open an older file on a RAPID system, it won't be read at the speed shown in a RAPID enabled SSD benchmark. The benchmark test data is in the RAM cache, not the SSD. The joke is, after the benchmark test is done, the test data would be written to the SSD, if the benchmark program did not delete it, as it normally does. Is any writing to the SSD done at the speed shown by a benchmark run on a RAPID enabled SSD? No, it is written at the speed the SSD itself is capable of. If anyone thinks RAPID makes their Samsung SSD faster, they are wrong.

When a RAM drive or RAM caching is used, when the PC is shutdown or restated, the data in the RAM drive or RAM cache must be written to a standard SSD or HDD first. Otherwise, it is lost.

Why doesn't the file system of an OS do that automatically now? Cache data to RAM, and then write it to permanent storage behind the scenes, as RAPID does. Sounds simple, right? Write caching exists in Windows now, and in the IRST AHCI and RAID driver. But the size of the cache is small, for many reasons.


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 20>
  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 0.063 seconds.