Disk Controller Performance - RAID

Due to the fact that we are testing two new chipsets in the form of the Intel ICH8R and JMicron JMB363 we decided to present a variety of RAID results in our P965 roundup. We utilize the same AnandTech iPeak test that is designed to measure "pure" hard disk controller performance. This consists of the Business Winstone 2004 and MCC Winstone 2004 benchmarks that provide a very good representation of general desktop performance. We also use the same Seagate 7200.10 Barracuda 320GB 7200 RPM SATA drive and average three test runs for the results. In our RAID 1+0 (10) and 0+1 testing, we utilize a four hard drive setup and a three drive combination for our RAID 5 testing.

iPeak Business Winstone Hard Disk - RAID

iPeak MM Content Creation Hard Disk - RAID

In a reversal of our single drive tests we see the Intel ICH8R leading the NVIDIA nForce 500 controller in our RAID 0 and RAID 1+0 test results. While the NVIDIA controller still finished ahead of the older ICH7R we see enough improvements in both the ICH8R chipset and drivers to finish first. This surprised us and after running our tests on the ASUS P5N32-SLI Premium (nF590SLI Intel) motherboard we found NVIDIA back in first place with results about 2% better than the ICH8R. However, since this board was not available in time for our roundup the results stand with Intel placing first. We feel like our ASUS P5N-SLI board is just not performing up to par in these particular hard drive tests.

We see the JMicron JMB363 controller finishing behind both the NVIDIA and Intel chipsets in both RAID 0 tests resulting in a slight role reversal from our single drive results. In our Business Winstone test the JMicron results fall behind the ICH8R RAID 1+0 results and NVIDIA 0+1 tests compared to our single SATA drive tests where this controller almost finished first. After reviewing our test scripts we noticed that the 2% read performance advantage this chipset had over the Intel offerings in single drive testing was flipped to a disadvantage of around 1% in RAID 0. We feel like this is a driver issue as the JMicron performed very well in our Content Creation tests where it finished ahead of the NVIDIA chipset in RAID 0.

Our RAID 1+0 and 0+1 tests were slightly surprising as we did not expect our on-board controllers to perform as well as they did when compared to the RAID 0 setup. This is due to our Seagate test drive as our Western Digital 150GB Raptor setup on the same controllers typically showed a 2% to 4% advantage for the RAID 0 setup. Our RAID 5 results were not a surprise as the CPU overhead incurred from either the NVIDIA or Intel drivers generally result in dismal write performance when compared to dedicated hardware based solutions from Highpoint, Broadcom, or Areca.

What we did not expect was the NVIDIA controller performing up to 5% better in RAID 5 after reviewing the RAID 0, 1+0, and 0+1 results between the chipsets. The difference turned out to be improved write speeds with the NVIDIA controller especially in the Content Creation test. Our test scripts showed excellent read speeds from our native chipset based controllers but write speeds were sometimes up to 55% less than our HighPoint RocketRAID 2320 dedicated hardware controller we will be reviewing in the near future. We found the Intel Matrix software interface was generally easier to use to setup up our various RAID arrays although the revised NVIDIA control panel with the nForce 500 series is significantly better now.

Disk Controller Performance Firewire, USB, and NIC Performance
Comments Locked

62 Comments

View All Comments

  • vailr - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link

    Re:
    quote:

    Intel in their infinite wisdom decided to pull PATA support from this chipset when over 98% of optical drives are still based on PATA technology.

    So, how about the (yet unreleased) ATI and NVidia Conroe chipset boards?
    Does either chipset include PATA support?
    Thanks.
  • Gary Key - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Does either chipset include PATA support?


    They both have native support for two drives.
  • n7 - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link

    Gary, always love your reviews!
    I read thru the whole thing, & it was a good read :)

    Meticulous detail, as well great sarcastic humor as well.

    I look forward to the following parts.
  • Sho - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link

    In an earlier AnandTech article, the one about Kentsfield support, it was written that Gigabyte would bring a revision 2.0 of all of their P965 boards to the market in mid-October, including the DS3. The article does not mention whether the board tested was this new rev 2,9 or any other. Could that be clarified?

    And does anybody know what was changed/fixed in 2.0?
  • Gary Key - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link

    Gigabyte has not released any further details on the revision 2 boards except for the fact they were addressing some layout issues and possible BIOS improvements. The only major change we could see them making would be going from a three phase power design on the DS3 to a five phase system as an example. The board we tested is still revision 1.
  • Sho - Saturday, October 21, 2006 - link

    Thanks!
  • dreddly - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link

    'caliper' should be caliber on AB9Pro page

    Great work on this roundup though, impressive job.
  • Puddyglum1 - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link

    quote:

    However, the board is not without its shortcomings. We certainly have an issue with this board...
    Which board? The topic of the previous page was about sound cards vs. onboard audio. Is there a missing page? Why is there a picture of the Asus heatsink and no mention of which board is the preferred of the bunch?

    Just some questions =)

    Great article for Cost/Performance comparison.
  • Puddyglum1 - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link

    Woah, there's a lot more there now. Thanks for the explanation.
    quote:

    Overall, the Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 performed the best in our benchmarks when not overclocked.

    I just built a workstation for a client using the 965P-DS3, but the board was DOA. I went to a local shop and picked up a 965P-S3 instead (seeing as how the only main feature missing was the solid capacitors of the -DS3), and it performed just as well as the DS3. For $110, a GA-965P-S3 would be the best Cost/Performance of the 965P bunch, in my unresearched opinion.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link

    Now you're skipping ahead to part 2! :p

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now