Z170 Extreme7+ / Samsung 950 Pro
Printed From: ASRock.com
Category: Technical Support
Forum Name: Intel Motherboards
Forum Description: Question about ASRock Intel Motherboards
URL: https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1168
Printed Date: 21 Nov 2024 at 11:01pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Z170 Extreme7+ / Samsung 950 Pro
Posted By: STANKYLEG
Subject: Z170 Extreme7+ / Samsung 950 Pro
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 10:15am
|
Just got 2 Samsung 950 Pro delivered and installed. Windows 10 detected both drives and installed just fine. buttttttt wondering when the Bios will support the new drive and the capability to Raid 0 it. THX!!!!!!! |
Replies:
Posted By: parsec
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 10:44am
|
Whether or not you can use two NVMe PCIe SSDs in a RAID 0 array is mainly dependent upon the Intel IRST RAID driver and EFI storage Option ROM. AHCI PCIe SSDs (SM951) can be configured into a RAID 0 array using the Z170 Extreme7+ board. I've done that myself. I haven't done that with NVMe SSDs, and am not aware of anyone that has done that yet. But it is easy enough to test for yourself. Ideally you would have Win 10 installed on another drive besides one of the 950s. Win 10 would have been installed in RAID mode, and the CSM sub-option in the UEFI, Launch Storage OpROM Policy set to UEFI Only. Or Win 10 installed in RAID mode and CSM disabled. You will also need to enable the RST PCIe Storage Remapping options for the M.2 ports you are using. Then in the Advanced screen, an entry for the IRST utility should be shown. That is where you can create a RAID 0 array of the 950s, if it is possible. If the 950 Pros are not listed as drives that can be used in a RAID array, then it can't be done yet with the current IRST driver and software. You can also try to create the RAID 0 array using the IRST Windows program, with all of the above requirements of course. ------------- http://valid.x86.fr/48rujh" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: STANKYLEG
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 10:52am
|
Yeah, familiar with it myself as I've done it with other SSD's. In the BIOS though, the bios shows the M.2 slots as EMPTY so you can't create a raid. I will try to post a picture of it. |
Posted By: STANKYLEG
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 11:08am
|
Here is what it looks like with the Samsung 950 Pro's installed, Slot 1 and 3 should be filled. The System browser shows them filled and Windows 10 sees both the drives fine, it's just the BIOS doesn't yet.  |
Posted By: STANKYLEG
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 12:50pm
|
well BIOS says N/A in easy mode for the M2 Slots and so does advanced. But the IRST will actually let you create/install the RAID it just had blank selection (basically the SSD had no title to select) but I was able to select the blanks, and it created the raid from there. these are the results I have gotten from 2 samsung 950 pro's in RAID 0 the SEQ Read/Write is around 2800 MB/s & 2400 MB/s damn with a single samsung 950 pro drive it was going about as fast as advertised 2400 / 1400 |
Posted By: parsec
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 2:40pm
|
You won't see any entries in the UEFI for NVMe PCIe SSDs when they are in a RAID array or not, when you have RST PCIe Remapping options enabled for the M.2 ports you are using. The only listing of your 950's will be in the IRST utility in the UEFI, and the IRST Windows program. We are now using two different storage protocols in one board, SATA and NVMe PCIe. Currently the two different storage protocols don't have their own configuration screens, if that is even possible with the current AMI UEFI firmware. The NVMe SSDs work fine but the multiple storage protocols used at the same time is difficult to deal with. Hopefully that will be improved and we will have better listings of the different drives. When you created the RAID 0 array, did you use the default 16K stripe size? If so, I learned with some other PCIe SSD users that you must use the 128K stripe size to get the best performance. Another thing we learned is if you clear the CMOS/UEFI, or update the UEFI to a new version (both set all options to their default values), when you start the PC after either of them, the RAID 0 array will fail. That does not happen with SATA SSDs in RAID arrays. If you want to use your RAID 0 array as an OS drive, be careful and always have a way to restore your OS installation easily, or you will be installing from scratch. ------------- http://valid.x86.fr/48rujh" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: DooRules
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 8:56pm
|
I have this board, also looking at a couple of 950 pros to play with. Some good info here parsec, thanks much... Surely there can't be two parsecs running round the net with this much raid info... good to see you again.
 |
Posted By: STANKYLEG
Date Posted: 05 Nov 2015 at 9:36pm
|
Yeah, i've seen it wipe out the Raid already once. Lol. debating if i should take one of them out until a Bios can stabilize it? |
Posted By: Starman63
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2015 at 8:04am
|
I have 2 new 950 pros in a 170 OC Formula. I have the raid created in the bios and it shows the raid is bootable. However, when I go to load windows (Yes, I have loaded the Intel 64 bit driver) it recognizes the entire 1tb (almost) drive, but will not install to it because it says the drive is not bootable due to the controller... I have tried MANY options and they all do the same thing. GRRRR |
Posted By: parsec
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2015 at 2:14pm
OMG, DooRules, is that really you?!?!?!   You've been MIA from the OCN SSD forum for a long time now, I was worried you drove your snow mobile off a cliff... seriously!!!  You gotta know it's me man, cuz it is. Great to see you are still in this game too!! Be careful with RAID 0 of these PCIe SSDs, you MUST use the 128K stripe or performance is terrible. Plus the IRST 14.6 driver is... the first one that really works with these SSDs, and is still a little flaky. Otherwise, lets see what YOU can do with these SSDs and ASRock board (??) ------------- http://valid.x86.fr/48rujh" rel="nofollow">
|
DooRules wrote:Posted By: parsec
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2015 at 2:24pm
Do you have the Launch Storage OpROM policy sub-option of the CSM option set to UEFI Only? Or are you installing with CSM disabled? Did you load the IRST 14.6 F6 driver, from the Custom installation option? You are in new territory with a RAID 0 of the 950 Pros as an OS drive. The controller message you mentioned worries me... this may not work, but I don't know yet either way. The Samsung NVMe driver is not an F6 type driver, it is wrapped up in an installer. Apparently the Windows NMVe driver won't work in RAID. Keep trying and ask for more help if you want to. ------------- http://valid.x86.fr/48rujh" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: parsec
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2015 at 3:24pm
First results for my single, 256GB 950 Pro (all they had left at MicroCenter  )   The high queue depth 4K Read IOPs in AS SSD is hilarious! NO, that is NOT a RAPID (poisoned) result! Otherwise the results are on spec IMO. I love to see the high 4K Random read speed, going over 50MB/s in AS SSD is rare, since it is the least forgiving benchmark. Samsung really seems to have limited the write speed on the 950, since it does not match that of the SM951. That must be to reduce the 950's temperature and prevent throttling. If only the IRST driver could preserve the high queue depth IOPS in RAID 0. The current driver results in the RAID 0 array having worse high queue depth 4K performance than a single drive, using SM951s. The IRST driver needs some work when it comes to its PCIe SSD support. All of these results were with the Samsung NVMe driver installed. ------------- http://valid.x86.fr/48rujh" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Xaltar
Date Posted: 06 Nov 2015 at 4:36pm
Damn that is quick. AS SSD is bugged for sure, as we discussed in my N3150M review. Over 50MB/s for 4k is  !
|
Posted By: Brimstead
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2015 at 5:50am
|
Starman, Had the same problem with installing Win10. Turns out there are two options in the UEFI boot list for my Win10 USB memory stick. One was listed as USB-MSFTWindows and the other was UEFI-MSFTWindows. Both were referring to the same memory stick. The USB gave the problem when I tried to install Windows. The UEFI as the first boot device let me install win10 just fine.
|
Posted By: DooRules
Date Posted: 07 Nov 2015 at 6:19am
|
Came across this raid 0 result. Only an atto bench but interesting none the less. Good scaling on writes, work to be done on the reads... this will be fun I think https://tinkertry.com/how-to-boot-win10-from-samsung-950-pro-nvme-on-superserver
 |
Posted By: STANKYLEG
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2015 at 6:53am
|
Thanks everyone & to parsec especially. the raid failed after some time. I was getting around 20-40% higher scores in AS SSD with it in RAID 0 but didn't save a screen shot this is one of the drives - i really feel raid is way too unstable. twice when it rebooted - the raid was unbootable. i kind of just gave up. maybe a bios update or two and it will be ok? honestly at this speed with 1 drive it's fast and stable. hope to hear back soon. thanks for creating such a great motherboard.  |
Posted By: parsec
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2015 at 2:43pm
|
Thanks for that STANKYLEG! I also found the RAID 0 array to be... delicate I'll call it. I have a feeling it is more of a problem with the IRST driver and IRST Option ROM, the latter being part of the UEFI/BIOS file. I want to assure you that you are not doing anything wrong (or don't seem to be ) that causes the RAID array to fail. I've seen this happen myself, and the first RAID 0 users with our ASRock boards that I worked with had the same issue. We even discussed ways to recreate the RAID 0 arrays used as OS volumes, by having backups or another OS installation we could clone to the RAID 0 array. That's what I did the first time I used my RAID 0 array of SM951s, I cloned my Win 10 installation from a single SSD to the RAID 0 array. That worked fine and I ran Windows from the RAID 0 array until it failed after a UEFI clear, which I did as a test.  I've said this elsewhere; after a simple UEFI/BIOS clear, and starting the PC and immediately going into the UEFI, meaning Windows did not boot and only the POST process completed, was enough to cause the RAID 0 array to fail. After resetting all the UEFI options to the values required for a RAID 0 array to function, and restarting the PC from the UEFI "Save and Exit" and going directly back into the UEFI again (no OS boot, only POST) did not bring the RAID 0 array back to life. I then let the PC boot into Windows, using another drive as the OS drive at that time when testing an empty RAID 0 array, and the RAID 0 array still had a status of failed, which is really no surprise. If you've ever worked with SATA SSDs in RAID 0, you know you can clear the UEFI/BIOS, which sets the SATA mode to AHCI (the default), and go directly into the UEFI, reset the SATA mode to RAID, restart the PC and go directly into the UEFI again, and you'll find the RAID 0 array is working fine. I've even moved a RAID 0 array of SSDs from one (Intel) board to another, and the RAID array still works. Actually, if you don't specifically delete the RAID array with SATA drives, you can't format them as a single drive in Windows. The RAID 0 metadata (data about the RAID array, which is stored on the drives in the array) remains intact on SATA SSDs. That does not seem to be the case with PCIe SSDs, which is just a theory of mine. I really don't see this as being something ASRock can simply fix. IF it was a UEFI problem, IMO the programmers of the UEFI firmware, AMI in this case, would be the only one that could fix it. Do you recall the events leading up to the failure of your RAID 0 array? ------------- http://valid.x86.fr/48rujh" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: parsec
Date Posted: 08 Nov 2015 at 3:00pm
Yes I remember that about AS SSD, producing odd results occasionally. I forget if I mentioned that happens on laptop PCs sometimes too. I agree over 50MB/s for 4K is wild, but that is one of the things NVMe is all about. NVMe somehow reduces the protocol overhead compared to AHCI on 4K random reads. Over 40MB/s 4K read speeds are rare for SATA SSDs. The main thing I don't like about RAID 0 arrays is they always have reduced 4K read speeds compared to using a single drive of the same kind used in the RAID array. Booting an OS is many small file/4K random reads, the 2GB/s+ large file sequential read speed does not matter much in that case. That is why many users would say they did not get faster boot times going from SATA II to SATA III SSDs. The large file read speed went from 250MB/s to 500MB/s, but unless the 4K random read speed increased significantly (which it didn't in to many instances), the boot time would not change. ------------- http://valid.x86.fr/48rujh" rel="nofollow">
|