New Atlas 10k III not breaking over 40MB/sec...**UPDATE** WinXP Write performance issues

[NFS4]

I just installed my new 18.4GB Maxtor Atlas 10k III u160 SCSI drive. I'm using a UW2 controller (LSI Sym21002) so it should burst up to 80MB/s. But checking under HD Tach, I'm only hitting 33MB/sec...WTF???

I'm running Windows XP BTW.

I've installed all the latest VIA 4-in-1 drivers and the PCI Latency patch from VIA's website.

 

[sharkeeper]

Make sure disk(s) are recognised as 80MB/S (U2W) devices by HBA.

Make sure termination is correct and proper cables are used.

You should see around ~70 MB/S burst in HD Tach with a drive running in U2W mode.

Cheers!

 

[NFS4]

Nevermind...I know what I did

Idiot!!

 

[BuckNaked]

NFS4,
You better check this thread... link... Seems there is a problem with SCSI and WinXP that MS seems to acknowledge as an OS problem...

I posted a link to a discussion over at the storagereview website that is a pretty long read, but prett informative...

Dave

 

[NFS4]

I fixed it...I had the damn cable on Port A...it should have been on Port B

 

[BuckNaked]

You may still want to read that thread and bench it with ATTO from attotech to see where you stand...

Dave

 

[BD231]

I fixed it...I had the damn cable on Port A...it should have been on Port B

lol, oop's

 

[Sundog]

<< I fixed it...I had the damn cable on Port A...it should have been on Port B >>


LOL Glad you figured it out.

 

[NFS4]

Well, I checked my performance, and I'm getting low numbers like everyone else

Guess I have to read the whole thread for a solution.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

<< Well, I checked my performance, and I'm getting low numbers like everyone else

Guess I have to read the whole thread for a solution. >>


abandon xp!! better yet abandon windows!!

 

[Blackberry Junkie]

NFS4, your u2w barely can beat today's latest ATA100 hard drive when it comes to transfer files except u2w can take over ata100 anyday in read access and cpu usage.

When I upgraded from u2w to u160. big difference in file transfer performance.

I will quote from your signature - Of course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong.

 

[NFS4]

<< NFS4, your u2w barely can beat today's latest ATA100 hard drive when it comes to transfer files except u2w can take over ata100 anyday in read access and cpu usage.

When I upgraded from u2w to u160. big difference in file transfer performance.

I will quote from your signature - Of course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong. >>



UW2 maxes out at 80MB/s
U160 maxes out at 160MB/s

u160 is overkill for a single drive.

 

[GoSharks]

i believe that the current fix as mentioned in the thread is to convert the drive into a dynamic disk with the disk management control panel.... not sure if that works for your boot drive though...

 

[NFS4]

<< i believe that the current fix as mentioned in the thread is to convert the drive into a dynamic disk with the disk management control panel.... not sure if that works for your boot drive though... >>


What does a dynamic disk do??:Q You mean like RAID or something?

 

[sharkeeper]

See here for more information on dynamic disks.

Cheers!

 

[Adul]

Ao how is the drive anyways? Speedy?

 

[rockhard]

NFS4 - It maybe worth considering getting a U160 controller in the future.
My Atlas III sustains well below U2W but peaks are off the scale so you are probably limiting the peak performance with your U2W controller.
I may be talking complete twoddle though
Im sure someone will put me right if i am.

 

[NFS4]

<< NFS4 - It maybe worth considering getting a U160 controller in the future.
My Atlas III sustains well below U2W but peaks are off the scale so you are probably limiting the peak performance with your U2W controller.
I may be talking complete twoddle though
Im sure someone will put me right if i am. >>


I may consider it in the future, but 80MB/s is just fine for now

 

[joohang]

Will you let me know how you like your new SCSI?

 

[Viper22]

Anyone have a link to the VIA Latency patch? ive got an IWill KK266-R motherboard and an Adaptec 39160 SCSI Controller. My Cheetah X15 drive only hits 52MB/sec burst using HD Tach. Thanks.

Viper22

 

[NFS4]

<< Anyone have a link to the VIA Latency patch? ive got an IWill KK266-R motherboard and an Adaptec 39160 SCSI Controller. My Cheetah X15 drive only hits 52MB/sec burst using HD Tach. Thanks.

Viper22 >>


My Atlas 10k III is only bursting 55MB/s in Windows XP in HDTach on a UW2 controller. If you're running Windows XP, that's probably your problem. As far as the PCI Latency patch, you can get it here under RAID performance patch:

http://www.viaarena.com/?PageID=66

 

[Sir Fredrick]

NFS4...I remember a thread very long ago (very long thread too) in which you argued against SCSI. I guess you've seen the light.

 

[NFS4]

<< NFS4...I remember a thread very long ago (very long thread too) in which you argued against SCSI. I guess you've seen the light. >>


Opinions change

 

[NFS4]

As far as Windows XP performance goes, it's not as fast as it should be. I've been reading the thread over at StorageReview, and write performance across the board for everyone in Windows XP compared to Windows 2000 is PITIFUL:

http://forums.storagereview.net/viewtopic.php?t=1758&postdays=0&postorder=&start=0

The last poster in the thread was kind enough to post Read/Write performance of his 2 Quantum Atlas 10K II TY184LDDD6 drives on a Adaptec 29160 controller.

Read performance (comparable to Windows 2000)
http://neilpeartrush.tripod.com/atto/attopics/page1.html

Write performance (pure crap compared to Windows 2000)
http://neilpeartrush.tripod.com/atto/attopics/page2.html


I'd like to load back on Windows 2000 and test this for myself, but I'm so used to Windows XP now that I can't go back

 

[Adul]

At least read performance is on par. But does write performance ever suck in XP and Win me. Maybe it will be fixed in a SP1.