Are disks running slowly on my new high-end build?

[Fredo792]

Hi:

I built a high-end system for video editing a few years ago and mothballed it for a while. I now have it up and running but I am concerned about possible mediocre disk performance. I'm not sure the SATA3 (6 GBPS drives) are running as fast as they could be. Perhaps they are only running at standard 3 GBPS speed.

I am looking for advice and resources to address the problem, if it in fact exists. Thanks in advance!

I'm including a lot of information below, in order to accurately describe the situation.

Here's the basic system configuration:

Motherboard: Asus P6X58-E Pro.
CPU: Intel Hex Core i7 970 3.2 GHz.
Memory: Corsair Dominator 24GB PC12800 DDR3.

Drives (simple, no RAID):
Boot Drive 1: SanDisk SDSSDXPS-480G Extreme Pro SSD.
Connected to motherboard SATA3 (6 GBPS port) with SATA3 cable.
Data Drive 2: Western Digital Velociraptor WD6000HLHX 600 GB SATA III 10000 RPM.
Connected to motherboard SATA3 (6 GBPS port) with SATA3 cable.
6 gbps SATA connections are managed through the Marvell controller.

Data Drive 3: Western Digital Velociraptor WD6000HLHX 600 GB SATA III 10000 RPM.
Connected to motherboard SATA (3 GBPS port) with SATA3 cable.
Data Drive 4: Seagate Constellation ES ST31000524NS 1TB 7200 RPM.
Connected to motherboard SATA (3 GBPS port) with SATA3 cable.
3 gbps SATA connections are managed through the Intel controller.

Bios, chipset, and SATA drivers are current.

The SATA3 drives did not show up correctly in BIOS. ASUS had me upgrade drivers, then make the following BIOS Changes:

Main -> Storage configuration
Configure SATA as AHCI
Main -> ACHI configuration
SATA ports 1-4 show as Hard Disk
Individual ports configured as AUTO
SATA ports 5-6 show as ATAPI CD-ROM
Advanced -> Onboard devices configuration
Marvell SATA6G controller: ACHI mode


I benchmarked three different pairs of SATA3 6 GBPS cables. No significant differences were noted.

Here are some benchmark results. Benchmarks were run under the

Boot drive SSD, SATA3 (6GBPS):
HD Tune Pro: 297 MBPS read, 0.080 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 380 MBPS read, 234 MBPS write
Network DLS DiskMark: 146 MBPS read, 181 MBPS write

Data Drive 2 Velociraptor, SATA3 (6GBPS):
HD Tune Pro: 117 MBPS read, 7.07 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 140 MBPS read, 137 MBPS write

Data Drive 3 Velociraptor, SATA 3 (GBPS):
HD Tune Pro: 120 MBPS read, 7.14 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 151 MBPS read, 149 MBPS write

Data Drive 4 Seagate, SATA 3 (GBPS):
HD Tune Pro: 109 MBPS read, 12.7 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 134 MBPS read, 130 MBPS write


Here are my observations:
- Average access time seems about right.
- Boot drive transfer rate seems low.
- The Velociraptor drives have about the same transfer rate, even though one is on a SATA3 controller.


For comparison, benchmarks run on a Dell M6800 high-end laptop are below. It runs Windows 7 64 bit and includes a Samsung SMB841 SSD boot drive, and Samsung ST100LM014 data drive (5,400 RPM):

Boot drive SSD:
HD Tune Pro: 338 MBPS read, 0.104 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 420 MBPS read, 370 MBPS write

Data Drive:
HD Tune Pro: 213 MBPS read, 17.3 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 82 MBPS read, 107 MBPS write


So the laptop SSD is up to 14% faster than the desktop SSD.
The laptop mechanical drive is up to 77% faster than the desktop drive 3.

Again, thanks for any advice and guidance!

Fred

 

[popatim]

The marvel ports werent designed to handle a high speed SSD. Do yourself a favor and just use the intel sata 2 ports, in the log run, they work alot better than the marvel's

 

[Fredo792]

Thanks, popatim. Additional research certainly indicates that the Marvell 91xx controller is questionable with SSD. I was not aware of that.

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1744725/ssd-issues-marvell-sata-controller.html
http://www.overclock.net/t/1274456/ssd-and-marvell-9128-controller
http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?24755-Marvell%C2%AE-PCIe-9128-controller-is-it-really-crap-with-SSD-s
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/698283-Sandforce-Vs-marvel

I connected my SSD boot drive and VeociRaptor to standard SATA ports and reran the benchmarks. Here are results:

Boot drive SSD, SATA (3GBPS):
HD Tune Pro: 230 MBPS read, 0.070 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 276 MBPS read, 260 MBPS write
Network DLS DiskMark: 209 MBPS read, 134 MBPS write

Data Drive 2 Velociraptor, SATA (3GBPS):
HD Tune Pro: 116 MBPS read, 7.09 average access time.
Crystal DiskMark: 140 MBPS read, 138 MBPS write

As a result, SSD sequential reads were up to 30% slower. VelociRaptor reads were about the same.

So the tradeoff in placing all drives on standard SATA ports would be a 30% reduction in SSD transfer rates - in exchange for reliability. Of course, random access would still be better than that of a mechanical drive.

Questions:
- Would it be safe to place mechanical drives such as the VelociRaptor on the Marvell 91xx SATA3 ports?
- Or for that matter place optical DVD / CD drives on those ports?

Note: Here are some benchmark results to compare to:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-upgrade-sata-3gbps,3469-4.html

Thanks,

Fred

 

[popatim]

Unless you are doing something involving large (sequential) files then the best benchmark to look at is the random reads & writes and low to medium queue depths, and the access time (which with an ssd should make 0 difference between controllers)

To answer your, you can keep the SSD'as where they were but I find that best practice is to keep them on the intel controllers. Keep in mind that your Marvel controller works better than the ones I have which peak at about 230 sequentially while the Intels peak at 245 for me. (Did you switch to the Intel ahci driver?)
I do use them for optical drives when the intel ports are needed for more HDD's otherwise I typically disable them to free up the resources and pcie lane.

 

[Fredo792]

Yes, the subsequent benchmarks I posted were with the SSD connected to the intel controller.

I did more research and contacted Asus. They confirmed that the motherboard's Marvel uses only one PCIE lane. They noted that Marvel came out with a new chip version: 9182, which likely would solve that problem.

They suggested getting a PCIE based hard drive controller card which would use at least two PCIE lanes and would contain the new Marvel chipset. That would yield the best throughput for the SSD.

I would want to get a card that uses at least two PCIE lanes. It might require external power.

Would you see any reason not to go with that option?

For example, are all Marvel controllers flaky with SSD? Do they handle TRIM ok?

I understand about benchmarking with random I/O's versus sequential - thanks.

 

[Fredo792]

After a lot of experimentation, I determined that:

a) The SSD drive runs the fastest on the Marvel SATA III 6 GBPS ports. Random I/O benchmarks are 59% faster than through the 3 GBPS ports. Sequential I/Os are 23% faster.

b) The SSD drive is 154% faster than a WD Velociraptor doing sequential I/Os when both are connected to the 6 GBPS ports.

c) The SSD is 98% faster than the Raptor with sequential I/O when both are connected to 3 GBPS ports.

Those results are as expected.

However, based on comments on this thread, discussions with ASUS, and other threads on this forum, I concur that the Marvel SATA III 6 GBPS ports are not designed for SSD. So I put all drives, including the SSD on SATA II 3GBPS ports.

This article was particularly helpful in making this decision:
Almost No Advantages for SATA 6 Gb/s On A Typical Desktop
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-upgrade-sata-3gbps,3469-16.html

Note that I did consider getting an add-on SATA 6GBPS card, such as the Syba USB 3.0 2-Port and SATA 6Gbps 2-Port PCI-e x4 2.0 Card. But comments on Amazon said that the OS is bootable through the card, but you need to do a Windows reinstall or repair after installing the card. Also, if you remove the card, and then replace it - even in the same slot - will cause an irreparable boot failure.
http://www.amazon.com/Syba-2-Port-Profile-Bracket-SD-PEX50055/dp/B00CHYOQIE

Right now, the highest priority is reliability. So I am avoiding the Marvel SATA 6 GBPS ports for disk as well as add-on card solutions.

Thanks for your help and for a great forum!
Fred

 

[popatim]

Thanks for the update 🙂