Will Intel Rapid Storage Technology work on a Pentium?

[SickBeast]

Hi Guys,

I'm having a really hard time setting up Intel Rapid Storage technology. I want to use a dedicated 120gb SSD to cache my 3tb gaming hard drive. I have put my computer into RAID mode and I have installed the drivers. The "accelerate" tab is missing in Intel Rapid Storage. I did some digging and this is a very common problem. I tried shrinking my Windows partition but that did not fix the problem.

Then I read somewhere that this will only work on a "Core" CPU, not on a Pentium. I have a Pentium G3258 and an Asrock Z97M Anniversary motherboard.

If any of you have any insight into this I would really appreciate it.

 

[tweakboy]

NOPE!!!

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Hi Guys,

I'm having a really hard time setting up Intel Rapid Storage technology. I want to use a dedicated 120gb SSD to cache my 3tb gaming hard drive. I have put my computer into RAID mode and I have installed the drivers. The "accelerate" tab is missing in Intel Rapid Storage. I did some digging and this is a very common problem. I tried shrinking my Windows partition but that did not fix the problem.

Then I read somewhere that this will only work on a "Core" CPU, not on a Pentium. I have a Pentium G3258 and an Asrock Z97M Anniversary motherboard.

If any of you have any insight into this I would really appreciate it.

With your prodigious record of 14,000+ posts, I feel almost deficient. But I CANNOT SEE how the processor is going to make a difference there. It is a feature of the chipset, and first appeared with the Z68 series. Are you sure that your reading didn't have a different meaning for "Pentium?" As in older processor gens?

When I bought my Z68 board in 2011, I never saw -- in any reviews, which I'd studied carefully -- any mention of a caveat pertaining to ISRT (smart response) as a feature of IRST (rapid storage) technology. It was a feature of the chipset, carried on by Z77, Z87 and now Z97 (I assume, for these latter two.)

Even so!! If you move your boot drive to a PCI-E add-in controller based on certain Marvell controllers, they have a similar feature that allows caching. In fact, the Romex PrimoCache software allows for it by creating an "L3 cache" between an SSD and an HDD, in addition to the RAM caching.

Somebody correct me on this, but it doesn't make sense that it would make a difference. That's got to be a really subtle distinction -- between an "i3" processor and this G3258 CPU.

Show me! Prove it to me! Somebody -- please! "Somebody . . . call . . . someone!! . . " [a quote from the ending lines of the movie "Se7en"] :biggrin:

 

[lamedude]

Artificial segmentation strikes again.

System requirements

• Intel® Core™ Processor in the LGA 1155 or LGA1150 package

 

[Fernando 1]

@ SickBeast:
Here is my comment to your problem:

1. Your request has nothing to do with the Intel Rapid Storage Technology. What you are talking about is the Intel Smart Response Technology (as BonzaiDuck already has mentioned). So you have chosen a wrong/misleading thread title.
2. It doesn't make much sense to use a 120 GB sized SSD just for caching purposes. If you want a better performance, you should install the OS itself onto the SSD.
3. As lamedude has already pointed out, the Intel Smart Response Technology requires a Core CPU.

 

[SickBeast]

Thanks very much guys.

 

[VirtualLarry]

SRT won't work with a G3258 on a Z97 board? WTF???

Y'know, F intel. They suck hardcore for this BS.

Pay extra for a feature, and it won't work, unless you also pay extra for your CPU?

That's just as bad, if not worse, than NVidia locking out PhysX on a secondary NV card, when your primary card is an AMD/ATI card.

 

[Jovec]

SRT is limited to 64GB anyway. So instead, do this: Create 120GB partition on SSD. Install games on 3TB as usual. Use Steam Mover to move the game(s) you are currently playing from HDD to SSD. When you are no longer playing them, move them back from the SSD to the HDD to free up space. Steam Mover just creates junctions and you can do the exact same thing from the command line.

There are also other caching solutions you can look to implement (paid software).

 

[dave_the_nerd]

It doesn't make much sense to use a 120 GB sized SSD just for caching purposes. If you want a better performance, you should install the OS itself onto the SSD.

Not so sure about that. Some game installs are pretty big - if I assume the cacheing would be "smart" enough to put my two most frequently played games and my OS on the SSD, that would come out to around 90GB.

 

[Cerb]

Not so sure about that. Some game installs are pretty big - if I assume the cacheing would be "smart" enough to put my two most frequently played games and my OS on the SSD, that would come out to around 64GB.

Fixed. 120GB is fine, because 60-64GB cost minimally less, and performance is higher, today, but Intel decided SRT was going to be capped at 64GB, and that's that.

http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1228347
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1641401

I'm with the OP, VirtualLarry, and BonzaiDuck.

 

[Diogenes2]

This was kicked around a lot back when SSD caching was first available..

Because of the overhead, there are diminishing returns as the cache gets larger, and Intel claimed that 64GB was the sweet spot, and thus the limit..

Not so sure about that. Some game installs are pretty big - if I assume the cacheing would be "smart" enough to put my two most frequently played games and my OS on the SSD, that would come out to around 90GB.

The caching doesn't look at what you do the most, it looks at what you did last, and that is what it caches...

 

[BonzaiDuck]

This was kicked around a lot back when SSD caching was first available..

Because of the overhead, there are diminishing returns as the cache gets larger, and Intel claimed that 64GB was the sweet spot, and thus the limit..




The caching doesn't look at what you do the most, it looks at what you did last, and that is what it caches...

The old topic re-emerges! I am still skeptical that the I-S-RT feature is tied in some way to the processor, but it only matters about $30-worth.

VirtualLarry may or may not remember, but back when I built the sig-rig, I chose ISRT as a storage option. I made the mistake of choosing an Intel Elm Crest 120GB SSD and using part of it for cache, the other part as a small drive volume. It would "hiccup" once a week, but not with BSODs or resets (Larry may also remember my more recent troubles -- now done away with.) I replaced the Elm Crest with a Patriot Pyro 64GB SSD. It was a rock-solid setup, and apparently had nothing to do with more recent troubles. I would, however, recommend an SSD that didn't have the Sandforce controller. And I say that, despite the glitches that occurred with the Intel.

IF -- IN FACT -- ISRT isn't available for the G3258 processor ( I still don't believe it, but enlighten me . . ) -- you can do one of two things:

1) Disable the onboard Intel controller and stick a PCI_E SATA-III controller such as this one in an appropriate x2 or x4 slot:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...0037-_-Product

It has the HyperDuo feature. This feature is part of a Marvell 9xxx controller chip, and other such controllers would have the same feature. Also -- CORRECTION -- you shouldn't need to disable the onboard controller, but only move your boot drive (cache-SSD and boot HDD) to the StarTech Marvell.

Criticism of this approach may be unfounded: "It doesn't do the caching at the block level, but only the file level." It may in fact be block-level caching. But, while I use the controllers in the link -- I haven't yet tried it myself.

2) Download the 90-day trial version of this:

http://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/primo-cache/index.html

Pay attention to paragraph 2. The software provides both the features of Samsung RAPID and ISRT. Nor should there be a limit to the size of the "L2-enabled" SSD that can be used.

There is another product called SuperCache produced by a company called SuperSpeed in Massachusetts, but it only does the RAM-caching. HQ for Romex is in Shanghai. You could have reservations, but they are likely groundless (hacking by the Chinese military, etc.)

I have tested both of these software products. They do the caching at the block level. SuperCache costs 2.5x more than the single-PC Primo, and anyway -- doesn't do the SSD-caching/HDD acceleration. I still have PrimoCache implemented on my laptop, and it circumvents the limitations of the SATA-II controller. I have it doing RAPID functions. I bought the 3-PC license, and tested it on an HDD-based system -- also good. But never tested the L2 feature with an SSD. There is no reason it would be any less reliable than the L1 Ram-caching feature.

But I STILL can't believe the G3258 CPU limits the use of the SRT feature. SRT is a feature of the chipset. HOw on earth could it depend on the CPU, if the CPU is compatible with the motherboard and chipset?!!?

UPDATE: Well, damn! There is more evidence for the older Z68 chipset that SRT is not available with a "non-'CORE'" processor. So they give you an "unlocked" dual core processor with G3258, but no . . . damn . . . SRT! And if you use an i3 dual-core, you get the SRT feature, but the CPU is locked.

I have a great idea. Round up all the marketing people who influence engineering decisions. March them out to a camp in Utah. Make them watch TV and only certain movies and shows 24/7. Give them "political re-education." It's like women -- can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em. In order to have a successful product, you need good engineering team, and you need a market-research team to determine what the public wants, what features to include.

It just seems too parsimonious that they'd split hairs over these things such as they do. MU****F****rs!! Marketing has screwed up our politics, AND our computing!! Day of the Machine Gun!! Show Trials!! Make 'em pay!!
:twisted::thumbsdown::thumbsdown: