Intel raid or Promise raid?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

My motherboard is Asus P4P800E Deluxe, running Windows XP pro SP2.
the motherboard has build-in Intel chipset ICH5R support SATA raid function.
But it also has a build-in Promise Fastack 378 SATA raid controller.

I have 2 SATA harddisks and planning to run raid 0 mode. Which SATA should I
use?
Intel or Promise, which one is faster, better?
 

bar

Distinguished
Apr 10, 2004
1,144
0
19,280
0
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

RAID (redundant array of independent disks; originally redundant array of
inexpensive disks) is a way of storing the same data in different places
(thus, redundantly) on multiple hard disks. By placing data on multiple
disks, I/O operations can overlap in a balanced way, improving performance.
Since multiple disks increases the mean time between failure (MTBF), storing
data redundantly also increases fault-tolerance.

A RAID appears to the operating system to be a single logical hard disk.
RAID employs the technique of striping, which involves partitioning each
drive's storage space into units ranging from a sector (512 bytes) up to
several megabytes. The stripes of all the disks are interleaved and addressed
in order.

In a single-user system where large records, such as medical or other
scientific images, are stored, the stripes are typically set up to be small
(perhaps 512 bytes) so that a single record spans all disks and can be
accessed quickly by reading all disks at the same time.

In a multi-user system, better performance requires establishing a stripe
wide enough to hold the typical or maximum size record. This allows
overlapped disk I/O across drives.

There are at least nine types of RAID plus a non-redundant array (RAID-0):

RAID-0. This technique has striping but no redundancy of data. It offers the
best performance but no fault-tolerance.

Given the above, there is little to choose between various chips sets. Does
the manufacturer show a preference for RAID 0 with 2 HDDs in the user
manual. They must have some reason for providing two chips sets.


"Anthony So" wrote:

> My motherboard is Asus P4P800E Deluxe, running Windows XP pro SP2.
> the motherboard has build-in Intel chipset ICH5R support SATA raid function.
> But it also has a build-in Promise Fastack 378 SATA raid controller.
>
> I have 2 SATA harddisks and planning to run raid 0 mode. Which SATA should I
> use?
> Intel or Promise, which one is faster, better?
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Anthony So" <nomail@mail.com> wrote in message
news:uDoznAptEHA.1176@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

> My motherboard is Asus P4P800E Deluxe, running Windows XP pro SP2.
> the motherboard has build-in Intel chipset ICH5R support SATA raid
> function.
> But it also has a build-in Promise Fastack 378 SATA raid controller.
>
> I have 2 SATA harddisks and planning to run raid 0 mode. Which SATA should
> I use?
> Intel or Promise, which one is faster, better?

I have a GB 8KNXP with the same chipset and a Sil3112 in lieu of your
Promise controller. When I installed my RAID0 I asked for advice like
you're doing and the consensus was to use the on-chip ICH5R over the
on-board controller (Silicon Image in my case, Promise in yours). The
reasoning was that the ICH5R taxed the PCI bus less than the on-board
variant.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

It is faster to use the Intel on board chip for raid since the data
accesses the Southbridge chip directly giving you a higher amount of data
transfer speeds. This question was answered in a recent issue of Maximum
PC.

Hope this helps....
John

"BAR" <BAR@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:E3CAB4DB-DE08-4ED8-8ADF-3EDD75B3CEE8@microsoft.com...
> RAID (redundant array of independent disks; originally redundant array of
> inexpensive disks) is a way of storing the same data in different places
> (thus, redundantly) on multiple hard disks. By placing data on multiple
> disks, I/O operations can overlap in a balanced way, improving
> performance.
> Since multiple disks increases the mean time between failure (MTBF),
> storing
> data redundantly also increases fault-tolerance.
>
> A RAID appears to the operating system to be a single logical hard disk.
> RAID employs the technique of striping, which involves partitioning each
> drive's storage space into units ranging from a sector (512 bytes) up to
> several megabytes. The stripes of all the disks are interleaved and
> addressed
> in order.
>
> In a single-user system where large records, such as medical or other
> scientific images, are stored, the stripes are typically set up to be
> small
> (perhaps 512 bytes) so that a single record spans all disks and can be
> accessed quickly by reading all disks at the same time.
>
> In a multi-user system, better performance requires establishing a stripe
> wide enough to hold the typical or maximum size record. This allows
> overlapped disk I/O across drives.
>
> There are at least nine types of RAID plus a non-redundant array (RAID-0):
>
> RAID-0. This technique has striping but no redundancy of data. It offers
> the
> best performance but no fault-tolerance.
>
> Given the above, there is little to choose between various chips sets.
> Does
> the manufacturer show a preference for RAID 0 with 2 HDDs in the user
> manual. They must have some reason for providing two chips sets.
>
>
> "Anthony So" wrote:
>
>> My motherboard is Asus P4P800E Deluxe, running Windows XP pro SP2.
>> the motherboard has build-in Intel chipset ICH5R support SATA raid
>> function.
>> But it also has a build-in Promise Fastack 378 SATA raid controller.
>>
>> I have 2 SATA harddisks and planning to run raid 0 mode. Which SATA
>> should I
>> use?
>> Intel or Promise, which one is faster, better?
>>
>>
>>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Johnny Ragazzo" <john_ragazzo@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%239o0BmLuEHA.2808@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

> It is faster to use the Intel on board chip for raid since the data
> accesses the Southbridge chip directly giving you a higher amount of data
> transfer speeds. This question was answered in a recent issue of Maximum
> PC.

I'm saving your comments so the next time I reply to this question I'll
state it more succinctly. Thanks.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY