E6600, E6700, Please Help! Building My Dream Computer :)

[aoe]

I found this thread. Probably best to ignore all the trashing of thg at the beginning of the thread, as it's not constructive.

Anyway, there's 1 post that suggests a possible solution:

2 x 150 raptors on 680i motherboard:



The trick to getting all the speed is here:



go into device manager...scsi & raid controllers...right click on nvidia 590/570/550 serial ata controller click properties..make sure primary and secondary channels look like this...reboot and rebench...you will see a difference.

Anyway, this 'fix' seems to have worked for some. However, also bear in mind that this is a relatively new chipset, so keep an eye open for BIOS and driver updates.

Note: I'm having problems getting the 2nd image link to work in preview mode. Even though the bbcode looks good, it seems to be linking to the thumbnail image. So here's the link without the image ~> link

 

[Deth]

The amount of money I'm pouring into this new computer is crazy. 8O Oh well, I have to pay for quality. So I ended up getting the 3ware 9500S-4LP 64-bit/66MHz PCI2.2 SATA Raid Controller Card RAID 0/1/5/10 JBOD. Pretty expensive, but its the price I have to pay if I want the performance I so much desire. Coming in at $300, and I only intend to use only 2 of the 4 internal connectors. The main reason I bought it was because its a good solid "real" RAID, unlike the software-assisted RAID found in cheaper raid controllers. The reviews were awesome and it has 128MB ECC cache memory and hardware XOR engine.

Now, are there any more problems I have to address (and pay for the solution, lol) before I build my dream computer.


Ah. I just noticed your 2nd post aoe. So do you think my solution of buying this Raid controller will out perform your solution of changing the settings around in hopes it will work? I'm curious of the performance outcome and difference of each solution.


I also noticed this Raid Controller offers RAID 5.

RAID-5 is still one area where the mass markets have not touched, but it's still one of the most popular RAID levels for those who want high-end performance but still require data redundancy.

Do you think I should buy a 3rd WD Raptor and set-up RAID-5? Lol. I'm crazy

 

[aoe]

Hmm - have you considered SCSIs ? (don't even think about it - I'm joking).

You should have let me know which companies you were buying these components from so I could have bought shares beforehand

Let me know how everything goes with the build and the OC.

 

[aoe]

That Raid controller will perform better than an onboard solution, but by how much I'm not really sure. It shoud also overcome the problems related to the motherboard chipset previously discussed.

I also noticed this Raid Controller offers RAID 5.

Do you think I should buy a 3rd WD Raptor and set-up RAID-5? Lol. I'm crazy

This article gives a nice overview of the different RAID levels. It looks like RAID 5 doesn't provide the same performance as RAID 0. I personally don't think you should buy another Raptor and go for RAID 5. As to whether I think your crazy - well, that's a very subjective question. You'll need to define 'crazy' before I can comment :lol:

 

[Deth]

After reading an article on the 3Ware 9500S-4LP H2Bench - RAID-0 - Repetitive Sequential Transfer Rate, the raid card doesn't seem that hot after all which doesn't look good for me.


I had a question concerning what you chose (and everyone else for that matter) for the stripe size when setting up RAID 0 for your Raptors. Also, what is your cluster size? Trying to maximize my performance for my system, any help is appreciated, thank you

Knowing a bit more about how disk access works in operating systems, I would recommend another formula:

stripe size = cluster size / number of RAID-0'd drives

A filesystem cluster is the smallest amount of data a program can read from the disk (or write). Even if you request only a single byte, the OS will generously read in the whole cluster (4 kilobytes by default for NTFS). So, if you have two RAID-0 drives, a stripe size of 2K would make sure that you always have each drive processing the sama amount of data.

Mind you, for this to work, the stripe size has to work out exactly. Cluster and stripe sizes are always in power-of-two multiples of 512 bytes. So if you have an odd number of hard drives in RAID-0, you cannot possibly get an optimal stripe size.

Fragmentation is a filesystem issue, and has absolutely nothing to do with the underlying hardware. You get exactly the same fragmentation no matter how you configure your RAID stripes underneath. Fragmentation does depend on the cluster size though, so if you follow Zolar1's advice and tie the size of clusters to the size of stripes, then you get worse fragmentation with smaller stripes because your clusters will be smaller too (by your own choice), not because the stripes are somehow affecting the filesystem itself.

If we bring filesystem configuration into the formula, assuming that you are actually going to tweak NTFS, then you should first consider your filesystem clusters and only then the RAID stripes. If you make your clusters bigger, you waste disk space, but you will get less fragmentation and more performance. Alas, any other cluster size than 4K will also deny you some NTFS features like file compression. Once you get your cluster size right, decide on the stripes.

Or, if you are not fond on maths and planning, do like I do - set the stripe size to the smallest possible value. This will make sure that no matter the cluster size, the request will always cover the maximum amount of drives. Even if the disk access will span the array several times, the end result will be the same (unless you have a very, very, very stupid RAID controller/driver) - all the drives will do the same amount of work.

what I infer from Nodsu's comments is that he recommends a stripe size of 32 kb and a cluster size of 64 kb (max for NTFS) if the user is not worried about wasted file space and is running RAID-0 with two HDD's.

 

[aoe]

As I've never owned a raid controller, I can't really comment on the difference in performance over onboard raid. However, looking at the date of the review and their conclusions, there are suggestions that their test results may be due to poor drivers, and there may be better drivers available at this time.

I personally didn't think there would be much difference in performance between onboard raid and a raid controller considering what my pc is used for. If I were to do video encoding, database-related activity, or something similar where disk performance is at a premium, then I would maybe consider investing the money in a decent raid controller.

Regarding choosing cluster size (not sure what you mean by stripe size), I've been running RAID 0 for some time now, and always used to go with the standard cluster size (64K or 128K - can't remember). I then noticed this thread and specifically the following post:

I've been using 2 Raptors in RAID 0 for over 2 years now and have played with several different RAID configs in the years before that.
I have gone multiple ways with RAID 0 (single drive/ raid0 by itself/ raid0 for os + additional drive/ single drive for os + raid 0 stripe) for extended periods of time, played with different stripe sizes, etc, and my personal preference is that for the best performance overall, RAID 0 as primary + an additional drive will give the best results. I care not to make an argument as to the how or why, but in my experience RAID 0 can and will give people a multitude of results which will always hinge on how the RAID 0 stripe is setup. Using RAID 0 can and will kick the crap out of a single drive configuration, or using RAID 0 will suck big hairy donkey sack. Whether RAID 0 will work for you depends because it's a loaded question ;-) ** how ** you configure it will make all the difference in the world.

Myth: RAID 0 will make my computer faster.
Theoretically this is correct. But like the sticker on a car that says how many miles to a gallon the car gets... your mileage will vary. As a primary volume RAID 0 by itself will not net a significant gain because most of your performance gains are negated by the constant disk thrashing of windows. If setup improperly, things may even seem slower.

Myth: Stripe size doesn't matter.
Women say this too, and it's a lie. Stripe size will optimize your read/write performance for real small files (4k)up to real large files (512k). You could go middle-of the road (64/128k) but the term "jack of all trades master of none" comes to mind.

Here are my takes on a few RAID configs:

Single Drive (no RAID): slow. too slow for me. Even a PMR drive is too slow for me.

Single Drive for OS + RAID 0: Unless you are encoding I don't see much of a point to this one. You will see next to no performance gain at all. All of the core OS files are on the slower drive. Even if you install programs to the RAID stripe, you still have to constantly load DLLs and such from the slower drive.

RAID 0 by itself: most gains are negated by windows "disk trashing" and many times seems slower than using a single volume. If using Raptors is very size limited.

RAID 0 for OS + Single Drive: A bit of a pain to setup but will net the best performance gains plus storage capacity will never really be a problem.

My tipes for RAID 0 + Single Drive:

This assumes you plan to use RAID 0 as the primary volume.

(1) Plan Ahead
RAID 0 performance is all about stripe size versus the size of files you are working with. If your RAID 0 is going to be your primary volume then you should set it up with this in mind. Most OS files are fairly small so the approach to take is to optimize the stripe size of the RAID 0 for these smaller files. The RAID BIOS may recommend a 64k/128k stripe... but what are you planning on encoding?? And... why would you ever want to do that with your primary volume anyway?? The smaller the stripe size, the faster the read/write IOs (theoretically) for smaller files. I tend to keep my stripe size at either 16k or 32k. I've had the best results at 32k. Yours may vary. A nicely optimized SATA RAID 0 array of 2 WD Raptors should be able to install XP in less than 10 minutes start to finish. Mine finished in just under 8. It should also boot a clean XP installation very, very quickly.

(2) Run lean and mean
Turn off all the semi-useless crap. System Restore, hibernate, error reporting... anything that contributes to "disk thrashing". Also, move the Windows pagefile to the other drive and set it to a static size... i usually stick with 2x RAM.

(3) Offload everything you can
Plan to use the RAID 0 for nothing more than the core OS and Program Files... The goal is speed. Whether you're launching Word or WoW you want the programs to launch fast. MS Word the program may require your PC loading 50 different files... your word document is only one file. Keep that one file somewheres else.

(4) Size/Type doesn't matter
Capacity and type of drive really doesn't matter for the secondary volume... hell when I started I grabbed an old 40 gig out of my closet of spare parts. Its a good way to breathe some new life into an old 20 or 40gig IDE drive. And the beauty is you can always step up to a larger drive at any time by just copying everything over.

So, when I reinstalled recently, I went for a cluster size of 32K to see if that was any better. I already came to the same conclusion regarding what to use the RAID for (OS + Programs) from my previous experiences. I also have a separate 150GB raptor (not in the RAID) for game installations, but that's just personal choice.

Unfortunately, I don't do any benchmarking as such, and each reinstall is generally due to an upgrade, so each time the system performance increases.

There is a suggestion in the above quote about moving the page file to another disk. Again, I used to do this, but I now prefer to leave this on the RAID 0. Setting it to a static size is a good idea (prevents migration and fragmentation), but my page file hardly gets used at all - with 2GB of memory, there's never a situation where no memory is available, so windows just dumps the bare minimum to the page file. I also disable paging executive in the registry to minimise as much as possible what is written to the page file. Anything that does get written (or read), I want that to be as fast as possible.

 

[aoe]

Here's another interesting thread on hardware raid controllers.

Also, check the RAID FAQ on the hard disk forum.

 

[Deth]

So you went with stripe size of 16K and cluster size of 32K? I might try that, if stripe size should be half of the cluster size.

I read all the different threads, I just hope everything is patched up and works great. Nothing is worse than spending $300 on something that improves performance by squat. Might as well use the on board RAID if performance doesn't increase! Least I would've saved $300. (Not to mention I spent additional money to have the RAID card rushed to me so it gets here by Friday and I can test this monster of a computer out!)

My logic is that I rather enjoy all the performance gain when I first build/try my computer rather than waiting a few months/years down the road when everything is outdated and I've been suffering with slower performance when I didn't have to. $300 is a lot of money if the RAID card doesn't work like I want it to!

And I thought you can solve most problems with money. PFFT. I buy a quality product and the one thing I want it for, RAID 0, it seems to fail in. ROFL.

Anyways, Now I gotta buy a 3rd harddrive to put all my crap on.

So why don't you like moving the page file to the independent harddrive? Lowers overall system performance?

 

[Deth]

Alright, so most of my computer components arrived today! Cept for the computer case, the raid controller, and the cpu fan. But, that's alright. I can wait another day or two.

So anyways, I'm looking at the brand new retail Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6600 box as I type this. I found out its week 32, batch F. I've been reading through different posts trying to figure something out. How do I know if I got Revision B or not?

 

[jsc]

I have a similar system - parts bought last December while I was home on vacation.

Comments:

The board is a little complicated to set up. Search for a 680i overclocking guide. That will keep you from reinventing the wheel.

My motherboard's FSB will almost reach 450 Mhz.

The MCP does run hot. Use the little fan that eVGA puts in the box whether you are overclocking or not.

I cannot reach 3.6 Ghz using what I would regard as reasonable voltages (maybe with a better HSF). I work in Saudi Arabia and it is impossible to find what we would call good cases. I was not sure that I could find a case that something like a Tuniq would fit in. My cpu, however, will run at 3 Ghz on 1.25 volts.

I like the hex POST indicator on the motherboard. It is not as good as the LCD panels on some boards, but it is much better than just beeps.

If you overdo the frequency settings or memory timings, the BIOS seems to default to lower settings upon reboot. You do not have to clear the CMOS. I do not know how common this feature is.

I have always liked Crucial memory. About the only things that really aggressive memory timings affect are benchmarks.

Previous poster is correct more fans do not necessarily equate to more cooling. Watch your temperatures.

Since I am not using RAID, I do not have any experience in this area.

Enjoy

john

 

[Deth]

Hello all Again Glad to be back here. For the past 3 days, its been literally torture trying to get everything in my new computer to work. Even their tech support told me to RMA the MB because of the problems I was having, ROFL. I told him it could be fixed somehow, and he was like it'll be easier to just RMA it.

I've been posting on their forum a lot trying to get my EVGA mainboard working, so here's the jist of what happened in the past 3 days.

OK, Thanks to everyone who helped!!

Problem Solved. After 3 days of torture (Just bought this computer and spent every waking moment on it!), Everything is working GREAT cept the USB ports in the back of the case which don't seem to work correctly. The USB ports in the front of my case work beautifully! Is anyone else having problems with the USB ports in the back of the case? Any fixes to it? Thanks in advance.


Ok. So as you know I had a ton of problems with the motherboard not cooperating with everything else I bought (and I only purchased the quality, expensive stuff so I was shocked), and I called EVGA 4 times (3 of the times I kept disconnecting) and the 4th time we went through pretty much what I already did and he came to the conclusion that I should RMA the mainboard back and get another. I told him what I thought the problem might be and he thought it was easier to just RMA it back.

Well, that's not the spirit. I KNEW the problem could be fixed some how, I just didn't know how at the time and I wasn't about to give up! (The damn gigantic heat sink I bought [Thermalright S1-128] was such a pain to get on and the monolithic video card I bought [EVGA 768-P2-N837-AR GeForce 8800GTX 768MB] was a Nightmare to install in my cable infested Full Tower [NZXT Zero]. Well the Nightmare is over friends! And in case someone else gets the same problems I had (and I can't believe not everyone has them), I might as well tell you how I fixed this dream machine of mine. So happy the worst of it is over. Now I just want those USB ports in the back working properly and it's PERFECT.

Instead of writing a huge story, I'll get to the point and tell you the exact sequence of correct steps it took to go from nothing to All Fixed.

1. I tried a million combinations of trying to get my computer to even work, let alone work the way I intended it to. I wanted my 2 WD Raptors in RAID 0. The on-board RAID wouldn't work for me, and I must've tried 10 times with all sorts of drivers and what not! By the way, I already flashed the BIOS and had all the latest drivers ready from the manufacturers. So anyways, I ended up using my $300 3ware 9500S-4LP SATA Raid Controller to get this set up working from the get go. And it did. Throw in the WinXP CD and have your floppy ready for the RAID Drivers.

2. Make sure ACPI is Enabled PRIOR to installing WinXP. (Thanks jimsikes!!!) Well mine was, but something was screwy with my computer at the time. So I reinstalled WinXP probably 23 times over the course of 2.3 days, and I noticed you also need to make sure when you go to Device Manager, that it says "ACPI Multiprocessor PC" under the Computer category. If it says "Standard PC", it's messed up and you need to reinstall WinXP and make sure your ACPI is enabled. And if it already was, then set everything back to Defaults or Flash the BIOS again, whatever you need to do. Eventually, it should say "ACPI Multiprocessor PC" under Computer Category after you install WinXP.

3. So at this point, my Internet still wasn't working. So what did I do? I installed Windows Vista Business. And now it actually installs because of the damn "ACPI Multiprocessor PC". Before, it kept saying my ACPI was disabled or I don't have a standard ACPI computer. Grrrr...

4. Once Windows Vista is installed, almost everything works now! Internet WORKS and my RAID-0 is WORKING! This ONLY took me like 2 days of constant testing and calling tech support to no avail. Hopefully this post will help SOMEONE out there!

5. Install all the Drivers you need that are made for Vista. I had to install the drivers for my Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer 7.1 Channels Sound Card, and now it works BEAUTIFULLY! Also installed drivers for my video card, but I DIDN'T install the drivers for my MB. The storage stuff and network stuff. My philosophy is, IF IT AIN'T BROKEN, DON'T FIX IT! I would be SO UPSET if I installed any of those drivers and my computer stopped working again. Its so Awesome when it FINALLY works!!

Ok. If anyone knows how to fix the USB ports, lemme know please! Thanks!

So if any of you have any ideas why the USB ports don't work, lemme know Maybe not enough voltage? there's 2 USB ports in the front of the case and 6 USB ports I see in the back. If I try inserting my flash drive in 1 of the ports in the back, it'll recognize there is an unknown device in the port (it won't function though), and it'll say its on reduced speeds or very low speed (like 0.000001 b/s)


By the way, now that I got the bulk of it working, what programs do you recommend using to stress test the computer? I didn't even OC anything yet. Which program is everyone using to tell if their CPU is Revision B or not? Thanks!!

 

[Deth]

Answer: Download CPU-Z's latest version.


The Revision I got is B2!! From what I hear, this is the best Revision to OC So should I set my goals for 3.6 or 4.0GHz

 

[Deth]

alright aoe, you wanted to see results? well, I got some RESULTS for you!

I said from the beginning I'm creating my Dream Computer. Best Computer for Playing Games and to save a few bucks here and there if I can. Well, it's been Quite an Adventure just building this awesome gaming rig.

Well, since I got the B2 revision and I didn't feel like wasting time. I Overclocked it to 3.6GHz. With the FSB set to 1600, makes the FSB and Mem clock speed a 1:1 ratio. My temps are low and the games play GREAT! I set my voltage to 1.50.

So I said to myself.. I wonder what the Windows Experience Index found in Vista would rate my ultimate gaming machine. Well, let's find out!

Figures. They score from 1 to 5.9, and I max out in 4 of the 5 categories!! Woot, and they couldn't give me 5.9 for the Processor?!?! I just OVERCLOCKED it to 3.6GHz and it's rated 2.4 GHz! HUGE increase! What should I do, go for 4GHz so the damn thing will give me the 5.9? ah its ok. I achieved my goal. 3.6 GHz and one heck of a sweet gaming computer.


Thank you everyone!

 

[roachrage]

A couple of concerns here based on my experience. One, there is a misconception that flash drives and other portable storage devices are safer than hard drive storage. Nothing could be further from the truth. You should store documents, music, photos on your hard drive, which is much more reliable than any portable storage. Then, make sure you have a backup plan. If you have 200 gigs of "my documents" then you should have a backup medium large enough to hold that + room for future growth. Then back everything up on a schedule. I have just over 300 gigs of data files on two raided 320-gig drives and I back them up to a similar setup.
Two, keep it as simple as possible. I will eventually go to a larger single drive (waiting for prices to drop) for a couple reasons. One, if you have motherboard troubles and you have to replace it in a couple years you'll have to put those raided drives in an identical system in order to recover your files. Two, the added speed isn't worth the added risk of an additional drive going bad, as well as noise and power issues.This of course doesn't apply to using one drive for data and another for the system, but then you have to have another drive for BU.

For what it's worth!

Roach

 

[aoe]

Well, that looks like a nice overclock

What program did you eventually use to test stability? I personally use Prime95 (2 instances running to fully load both cores), but I hear Orthos does an equally good job. I also use Memtest86+ for testing memory stability. You can create a bootable CD to run it.

I would also look at downloading TAT (Intel's Thermal Analysis Tool), as this will really load both cores, although this should be used to monitor temps under load rather than stress testing the OC. I found it here (Note: link goes straight to download at techpowerup.com).

Also, I use SpeedFan to check my temps. Read the Core 2 Duo Temperature Guide on these forums, as the way the temps are monitored and reported are different with the C2D processors. I had to apply offsets to the reported temps as they were incorrect. With the offsets applied, I'm running at 23C idle and 48C under load (these are Tcase temps, and I used TAT to load the CPUs as this provides the max load and temps).

It took me a while to work out my offsets as I had some strange results (see this thread for details). If you need any help workout your required offsets (if any are required), then post here or in a separate thread. CompuTronix is always willing to help, and I also have a better understanding now of how this works after his help.

 

[Deth]

Awesome, thanks for the info! I'm currently using Prime95 to stress my system. So far here's what I know (I'll edit this post with updates):

Currently:
CPU: 1.5V
FSB: 1.4V
is STABLE, so I dropped my FSB voltage down .1V, woot! I won't go any further because if it "feels good" might as well stop, lol.

I tried CPU: 1.4V, I got BSOD

Next test will be half way between 1.4V and 1.5V for CPU. I'll have to get Memtest86+ and run it when I sleep at night


--------



Fine Tuning............................Complete.

And the magic number is.........1.4875V STABLE. (CPU)

Under FULL LOAD, my CPU Temperature reaches 52C-54C.
Is that OK?

Thanks!

 

[Deth]

Fixed USB port problem for the back of the case.

The problem was caused by only using one of two USB 2.0 headers found on the motherboard. My tower has 2 USB ports found in the front of the case which only uses 1 of the USB 2.0 headers.

I ended up modifying an external bracket containing four more USB 2.0 ports. I used only two of these ports and taped off the two unused ports. This gives me a total of 8 functional rear USB 2.0 ports and 2 front USB 2.0 ports.


The only thing that puzzles me now is that I can hook up my flash drive to any of these ports and it will work perfectly. But if I use an USB extention cord (they sell them at the Dollar store for, you guessed it, one Dollar!), the flash drive won't function and says "Unknown Device" in Windows Vista.

I'm wondering if I go out and buy the $30 USB extention cord, if it'll make a difference?