Hi, i really like SSD technologie for system partitions. I just wonder what the big different between Sata II / Sata III on SSD. So i start some test on my system. I hope this will help to find the right SSD system. First at all my Hardware for SSD: Gigabyte Z68X UD4 B3 F10Bios 16GB Ram 1333 DDR3 Mushkin CPU Intel i5 2500k Benchmark Tool: Crystal Disk Mark 3.0.1 x64 I start my test with default clock. 2x 60Gig Mushkin Chronos SATAIII on SATAIII bus @RAID0 : After that my new setup 4x 60Gig Mushkin Chronos SATAIII on SATAII bus @RAID5: Well looks like Read goes up very cool but write... Im not sure it is because i have it only on SATAII, because my board only have 2 SATAIII ports. OK at last i try it with CPU overclock @ 4,5GHz, Same Raid5 setup: looks better as before. I search on web for the differents on SATAII and SATAIII (SSD) but i found near nothing... So i hope this will help. If you are useing SSD on your system, feel free to post a bench.
Isn't SATA III just an envelope term for Sata 6.0gbp/s, while SATA II generally refers to 3.0gbp/s I only have SATA II, which is kinda silly since at this point many SATA offerings max at at higher than what my 3gbp/s bus even supports
Your scores are pretty poor for SATA3 raid. You should get better drives. I get those speeds on a 2 disk ssd raid
like i say in my first thread, its on sataII because my board has only two sataIII ports, good old sandy bridge, cpu also not utd... But the Seq. read is still good.
SATA III offers a greater amount of bandwidth than SATA II but they are just theoretical limits rather than absolutes. That said if anything has a chance of saturating SATA III its a SSD. Unless there is a huge price discrepancy in Germany between II and III based SSDs I wouldn't care too much. Not like it won't be obsolete in a few years anyway.
My 2 disk sata 2 raid gets around 450MB/s read Your first picture says 2 sata III drives in raid on sata III controller - and its slower. But mine are OCZ Vertex 2 - which are pretty fast.
Please post your setup before we talk about. I run this on a first sandy setup, and he my board has only two sataIII ports ^^... Show us your bench and setup, thanks alot. Isent it the Freq. read counts?
Q6600 @ 2.40ghz 4GB Corsair Dominator @ 1066 2x Vertex 2 60gb in Raid 0 P5E Motherboard, cross flashed to Maximus Formula I am now running Windows Server 2008 R2 on this machine. When I did my original benchmarks when the drives were new - I was using Windows 7. Also, these drives are 2 years old and been in constant use (so there is quite abit of wear - hence the slower speeds). My current power on hours on both of these drives are 15532 hours. lol When new, I was getting around 450MB/s read and around 130MB writes Here is proof at how long these drives have been running and how much data transferred.
for SATAII its still good. Thats the point, SATAII vs SATAIII. Will change a lot when i change to four SATAIII ports, but i like to see your setups, thanks! I use the Q6600 before, lovely cpu Runs perfect on 3,2Ghz.
You really think its because mushkin SSDs? My Raid0 runs also for about 1-2 years. I use mushkin ram and ssd for years and i really like it. In combination with eVGA GPUs and gigabyte boards. My Raid5 runs now on SATAII. I step up from raid0 because i need more space. And i do not really run 4 drives in raid0.
The sata3 drives I have seen have been like the post by user name, which is quite massive difference.
thats why i start this thread. I run SATAIII drives on SATAII bus so i really like to see full bus speed on SATA3... I really sure when i use ivy board on complete SATAIII bus drives will grow alot... And yes, im not a fan of OCZ ^^
it is, but also about a year or older. Your OCZ : Maybe im wrong, but it counts the seq read/write. So when this is SATAII and III ?
My OCZ is SATA 2 and pretty much the same as your 2x SATA 3 drives on a SATA 3 controller. You should have MUCH better speeds than that.
well maybe, but i still love my 648MB/s Seq read on raid5 @SataII -.- I do not like push this to... because pc stuff change so fast its worthless, but this another story.
