MSI K9A Platinum Low Raid 0 Performance

[Orochimaru]

hello just build this pc a few days ago and I did some tests on my foray with HD Tach (and a website called pcpitstop.com) both seem to be reporting my hard drives are doing no more than 80 MB / s, even though I have RAID 0 of 3 units on the utility with the motherboard, a friend of mine (using 4 disks in RAID 0 for exactly the same type of hard drive) is over 320 MB / s in their impulses. I do not see how, while three of my records = 80 MB / s, 4 of their = 320 MB / s. I installed the driver and removed the jumper on the back of the unit (to be SATA II), I checked the RAID setup utility and all values seem to be perfect, but the units seem to be failing to deliver the speed i am looking transfer. My IDE drive is comparable to this configuration, the kind of defies the point that I paid so much money for a RAID configuration is giving me the performance of one of my albums. Windows recognizes a unit, and said: RAID 0, so I assume that the RAID is working is not only working properly

[Logan.M]

In general, RAID-0 performance is often exaggerated, although its speed seems too low. RAID-0 speed depends on many things: the way the RAID is created (block / fragment size, the driver disk, controller, etc.) Moreover, different tools show different speeds bank and not depend too much on what a tool he says. Some tips you can try:
- Enable / disable NCQ (Device Manager -> SCSI / RAID-devices);
- Try different block size;
- Try another / newer driver or try the driver that came with the card;
- Using the disk maker tool to have all the disks to check for errors. You may need to connect IDE like them to be recognized correctly.

[Abhibhava]

The motherboard uses the ATI Xpress 3200 chipset, which supports up to 4x SATA II, this is what I used to connect hard drives. The motherboard also offers a useful RAID 0.1, 0 and RAID 1 - RAID 0 I've used with 128KB block size (offering 64 or 128), was FastInit ON, and the other 2 values could not change, i activated all drives in the array and configuration (in the BIOS) to be seen as SATA RAID. The latest drivers i catalyst used was available on the website of ATI 7.5, drivers on the CD does not work because I use Windows Vista 64, and the CD says it doesn't support my OS, so I have downloaded.

[Balamani]

Well, the problem may (MAY) be related to the size of your block. Please note: All files are written to disk is divided into several pieces. A piece cannot be smaller than the block size specified when configuring RAID. Therefore, all files smaller than 128 kilobytes cannot be divided and written to a disk. Therefore, not divided. Windows uses a lot many files are small, so these files are burned to a disc. Benchmarking tools often use different file sizes, from a - for example - 4 kilobytes. Then it goes to 8, 16, etc. All of these read / write actions can not benefit from the configuration of stripes, because they are too small. My advice: try to set the block size to 32 kilobytes or, if that is not really possible, at 64. See what happens then.

[Apple.Mac.Rocker]

Hey I tried both configurations, I reloaded Vista about 3 times and tried 64 and 128 sizes of block also was more or less the same performance as the only choices were 64 and 128, and my friend said that 128 will cause give better performance. I do not know what to do now, I sent an email to ATI and they said contact MSI (although ATI chipset), so I sent one of MSI about 6 hours, still no response

[Nutty]

And according to the specs it says it can make up to SATA II 3 Gb / s, which is around 375MB, so I do not see how you can say, however, disclose only 90 MB? System works without problems, of course, but so did my old 30MB / s IDE hard disk of the reason I wanted all RAID was to do the load times of games I can play much faster, because my friends does almost instantly (02.01 seconds), while mine is still having 10 or more seconds, which is kindof crucial, and I can play on Player versus Player MMO, if I bought a PCI Express controller would give results like yours?

[Sn0w-Le0p@rD]

I'm a little late in this conversation, but I'll try to answer some questions i saw here. Raid 0 in the first place of consumption has some limitation motherboards sometimes the bandwidth of the driver and others is that the hard drives. More recently there is a major revision of the integrated RAID controller’s motherboards consumers who are on performance compared with the level Raid. What they found was that most consumers’ raid drivers had a hard time getting more than 100 to 120 mbps, no matter how many units were connected. The only one who can get more than that is the built-in Intel. So if you want to raid with the performance you need an Intel motherboard. When tested by NVidia and none of them could break 120. Do not even think that the AMD SB600 was included, but should be considered as a promising driver again the same thing. The same goes for USB.