Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 22, 2012, 08:24 PM   #51
matthewtoney
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post

This makes sense... there should be nothing stopping this card from achieving sequential reads of 800MB/s assuming the drives are up to it... which the two Adata drives in RAID0 certainly are.

I've emailed them again... hoping they can chime in on these results above.

----------



What slot are you running the X2 in and what year Mac Pro? While it shouldn't matter, it might be worth trying this card in one of the slots designed for a graphics card. I'm not familiar with the slot configuration in 2008 and earlier but in 2009 onwards, that would be one of the two bottom PCIe slots. I'm just wondering if there's something limiting the throughput on the Intel chipset or Apples implementation of the PCIe bus on the x4 slots.
My 2 Crucial M4's in RAID0 are capable of that 800MB/s read score as well but its not happening. I've personally tried mine in both the top slots (the slots closest to the drive sleds) in my 2009 with no difference.
matthewtoney is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2012, 08:34 PM   #52
phpmaven
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA USA
Just for comparison, since they are very similar products. This is what I'm getting with my 480GB OWC Mercury Accelsior.

Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2012-08-22 at 6.32.14 PM.jpg
Views:	69
Size:	50.1 KB
ID:	354047
phpmaven is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 22, 2012, 09:27 PM   #53
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by phpmaven View Post
Just for comparison, since they are very similar products. This is what I'm getting with my 480GB OWC Mercury Accelsior.

Attachment 354047
Hmmm.. that's revealing. It's in the same ball-park as other benchmark results for that card and similar to letscopro's results. Even though all these results are below what I would expect two Sandforce drives to do in RAID0, I guess this is all we can expect at this time. It seems the X2 is offering similar performance to the OWC Accelsior and considering you can buy the card and two 256GB M4's for around $500 it's bang for the buck is significantly better than OWC's product (which is smaller at 480GB and more expensive at $764).

Although I don't know whether it's remarkable or sad that my 4 year old Intel 80GB SATA2 drives in RAID0 are offering similar sequential read speeds to these current setups. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=841556

All these setups being capped at ~600MB/s makes me wonder if it's not the Intel ICH that's the bottleneck here. We really need someone to try one of these cards in the x16 slots (bottom two slots on a 2009+ MP).
__________________
tools: nMP for photography, rMBP for working, iPad for surfing, iPhone for communicating, Mac Mini for entertaining
Canon tools: 5D Mark III 24-105L/70-300L/35L/50L/85L for capturing

Last edited by VirtualRain; Aug 22, 2012 at 09:34 PM.
VirtualRain is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 12:40 AM   #54
phpmaven
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post
Hmmm.. that's revealing. It's in the same ball-park as other benchmark results for that card and similar to letscopro's results. Even though all these results are below what I would expect two Sandforce drives to do in RAID0, I guess this is all we can expect at this time. It seems the X2 is offering similar performance to the OWC Accelsior and considering you can buy the card and two 256GB M4's for around $500 it's bang for the buck is significantly better than OWC's product (which is smaller at 480GB and more expensive at $764).

Although I don't know whether it's remarkable or sad that my 4 year old Intel 80GB SATA2 drives in RAID0 are offering similar sequential read speeds to these current setups. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=841556

All these setups being capped at ~600MB/s makes me wonder if it's not the Intel ICH that's the bottleneck here. We really need someone to try one of these cards in the x16 slots (bottom two slots on a 2009+ MP).
I like the fact that the OWC card is completely plug-and-play. I'm not sure where I would put a second drive connected to the Velocity card. Also, I'm running an early 2008 Mac Pro and you can't boot from the Velocity card, so that's a deal breaker for me.
phpmaven is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 01:40 AM   #55
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by phpmaven View Post
I like the fact that the OWC card is completely plug-and-play. I'm not sure where I would put a second drive connected to the Velocity card. Also, I'm running an early 2008 Mac Pro and you can't boot from the Velocity card, so that's a deal breaker for me.
I believe you can boot from the Velocity... (although I guess they're on 2009+ machines). I wasn't aware the Velocity won't boot on a 2008.

I agree the OWC product is more elegant but it also suffers from being more constrained if you want to upgrade the drives or capacity. You can only use OWC SSD blades and their currently ridiculously overpriced and based on Sandforce which we all know can be a bit of a risk.

I've yet to see an ideal SATA3 solution for the Mac Pro. If the Velocity had mounting/headers for dual drives and was a 4-lane PCIe card, I'd be all over it... but I'd also like to understand where this 600MB/s bottleneck is coming from.

Alas, by the time the ideal solution comes around, the next MP will be here with native SATA3 support.
__________________
tools: nMP for photography, rMBP for working, iPad for surfing, iPhone for communicating, Mac Mini for entertaining
Canon tools: 5D Mark III 24-105L/70-300L/35L/50L/85L for capturing
VirtualRain is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 06:52 PM   #56
letscopro
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post
Hmmm.. that's revealing. It's in the same ball-park as other benchmark results for that card and similar to letscopro's results. Even though all these results are below what I would expect two Sandforce drives to do in RAID0, I guess this is all we can expect at this time. It seems the X2 is offering similar performance to the OWC Accelsior and considering you can buy the card and two 256GB M4's for around $500 it's bang for the buck is significantly better than OWC's product (which is smaller at 480GB and more expensive at $764).

Although I don't know whether it's remarkable or sad that my 4 year old Intel 80GB SATA2 drives in RAID0 are offering similar sequential read speeds to these current setups. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=841556

All these setups being capped at ~600MB/s makes me wonder if it's not the Intel ICH that's the bottleneck here. We really need someone to try one of these cards in the x16 slots (bottom two slots on a 2009+ MP).
I had the Velocity X2 in the x16 slot in my 2010 Mac Pro. Yes, had. I was having some issue with the Velocity RAID set up, so I removed the card. I'm now using the 2 SSD's with the internal SATA II RAID.
letscopro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2012, 07:47 PM   #57
ColdCase
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NH
Many SSDs loose a surprising amount of write speed when used in a RAID configuration. Goes back to the sandforce controller compressing data to gain write speed (takes a long time to write to flash memory, if not fresh, the memory gates first have to be erased before the data write). Some SSDs work better than others.

Reading is not an issue, as the SATA data pipe will limit the speed.

If you want performance and have the cash, look for RAM PCI cards.
ColdCase is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 12:38 AM   #58
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by letscopro View Post
I had the Velocity X2 in the x16 slot in my 2010 Mac Pro. Yes, had. I was having some issue with the Velocity RAID set up, so I removed the card. I'm now using the 2 SSD's with the internal SATA II RAID.
Really? What kind of problems? Sorry to hear that. It seems this card may be good for a single drive, but it may not be great for RAID0.
__________________
tools: nMP for photography, rMBP for working, iPad for surfing, iPhone for communicating, Mac Mini for entertaining
Canon tools: 5D Mark III 24-105L/70-300L/35L/50L/85L for capturing
VirtualRain is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 06:40 AM   #59
rexie
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Just purchased this card. Installed into my 4,1 Mac Pro, no problems, boots up OK. No SSD boot time 57 sec, SDD connected to spare DVD cable 37s, SDD on PCI card 47s (time from pressing power button). Have the Intel 520 240GB SSD. Open to any performance tests you would like me to run if free app.
Cheers.
rexie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 11:24 AM   #60
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by rexie View Post
Just purchased this card. Installed into my 4,1 Mac Pro, no problems, boots up OK. No SSD boot time 57 sec, SDD connected to spare DVD cable 37s, SDD on PCI card 47s (time from pressing power button). Have the Intel 520 240GB SSD. Open to any performance tests you would like me to run if free app.
Cheers.
Give this test a try... http://www.aja.com/ajashare/AJASystemTest.zip

Use 1920x1080 10-bit, 4GB file size for the test.
__________________
tools: nMP for photography, rMBP for working, iPad for surfing, iPhone for communicating, Mac Mini for entertaining
Canon tools: 5D Mark III 24-105L/70-300L/35L/50L/85L for capturing
VirtualRain is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2012, 06:09 PM   #61
letscopro
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewtoney View Post
For some reason the Black Magic Test is refusing to run on my RAID0 stripe on the X2. (tells me that drive is read-only, although it plainly is not - anyone with any idea on that?)

I've just run a bunch of tests on all my disks though in Xbench and I'm getting read/writes on it with the X2 very similar to what the other person was seeing. In my case - 566MB/s read and 579MB/s write.

----------




No this is just on 1 X2 card and yes I'm using the power from the optical bay to power the second drive connected to it.
What kind of adapter did you use to get the power from the optical bay?

I was using the OWC Mercury Elite Pro mini for the second SSD. I was having some odd things happening using this for my RAID setup. My menu disappeared and the computer was frozen the next day when using the Velocity and the external case. I've been using the two optical bay connectors for the RAID and have had no problems.

I would like to try coming straight off of the Velocity card to the SSD and see if that works. It would be nice to get the extra performance from the Velocity.
letscopro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2012, 02:57 AM   #62
rexie
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post
Give this test a try... http://www.aja.com/ajashare/AJASystemTest.zip

Use 1920x1080 10-bit, 4GB file size for the test.
I can't get this to work with either of my bootable drives, the SSD and a hard disk. It only works on the non-bootable raid and hard disks. The Start button just flashes blue on the bootable drives. Am I missing something?
rexie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2012, 08:10 AM   #63
matthewtoney
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by rexie View Post
I can't get this to work with either of my bootable drives, the SSD and a hard disk. It only works on the non-bootable raid and hard disks. The Start button just flashes blue on the bootable drives. Am I missing something?
Thats *exactly* what it does for me - I can't get a score with it on my RAID0 on the X2 either. (although probably like me, if you choose the "disk read test" and give it a nice big file on the RAID0 it will be able to do that part)

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by letscopro View Post
What kind of adapter did you use to get the power from the optical bay?

I was using the OWC Mercury Elite Pro mini for the second SSD. I was having some odd things happening using this for my RAID setup. My menu disappeared and the computer was frozen the next day when using the Velocity and the external case. I've been using the two optical bay connectors for the RAID and have had no problems.

I would like to try coming straight off of the Velocity card to the SSD and see if that works. It would be nice to get the extra performance from the Velocity.
I had to make my own - I never could find a prebuilt adapter that would give me a Y-cable for that combined data/power SATA like in the optical bay, so I used a SATA power extension cable and splice it inline to the cable in the optical bay. (then ran it out of a small hole right behind the second drive sled into the main bay of the case)
matthewtoney is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2012, 10:32 AM   #64
phpmaven
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewtoney View Post
Thats *exactly* what it does for me - I can't get a score with it on my RAID0 on the X2 either. (although probably like me, if you choose the "disk read test" and give it a nice big file on the RAID0 it will be able to do that part)

----------



I had to make my own - I never could find a prebuilt adapter that would give me a Y-cable for that combined data/power SATA like in the optical bay, so I used a SATA power extension cable and splice it inline to the cable in the optical bay. (then ran it out of a small hole right behind the second drive sled into the main bay of the case)
This is exactly why I sprung for the Accelsior. It cost a bit more than getting 2 SSDs and a PCI card, but it is a no-brainer to setup and I'm getting blazing fast performance.
phpmaven is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2012, 02:51 PM   #65
allYcad
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Dual Velocity Solo X2's and two 120GB Vertex3's RAID0

Allright you guys, I got TWO of the Velocity Solo X2's and configured them with TWO 120GB Vertex3's, RAID0.

I then used DiskTester 2.4.0 64-bit and ran the sequential-suite test.

I've attached the full report.

Below is the averages...

--------------- Averages for "Vertex3" (4GB/start, 5 iterations) ---------------
Transfer Size Write MB/sec Read MB/sec
[LEFT][LEFT] 32K 301 292
64K 397 378
128K 501 486
256K 582 592
512K 648 655
1MB 651 704
2MB 687 813
4MB 757 890
8MB 800 968
16MB 836 997
32MB 849 1018
64MB 853 1022
128MB 852 1030
256MB 858 1031

Command "run-sequential-suite" executed in 915.74 seconds on Saturday, August 25, 2012 11:32:20 AM PT
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Dual Velocity Solo X2.pdf (25.1 KB, 81 views)
allYcad is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2012, 02:59 PM   #66
allYcad
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Single Velocity Solo X2 with TWO Vertex3's, RAID0

Now this is just one of the Velocity Solo X2 cards configured with both of my 120GB Vertex3's.

Once again, running DiskTester 2.4.0 64-bit and the sequential-suite test.

I've attached the full report.

Below is the averages, pretty good actually...


--------------- Averages for "Vertex3" (4GB/start, 5 iterations) ---------------
Transfer Size Write MB/sec Read MB/sec
32K 263 257
64K 319 340
128K 388 428
256K 435 501
512K 441 518
1MB 461 562
2MB 495 631
4MB 525 674
8MB 541 710
16MB 550 723
32MB 552 734
64MB 555 738
128MB 557 741
256MB 551 744

Command "run-sequential-suite" executed in 1199.74 seconds on Saturday, August 25, 2012 12:22:52 PM PT
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Velocity Solo X2 RAID0.pdf (24.1 KB, 35 views)
allYcad is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2012, 03:22 PM   #67
avemestr
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by letscopro View Post
I had the Velocity X2 in the x16 slot in my 2010 Mac Pro. Yes, had. I was having some issue with the Velocity RAID set up, so I removed the card. I'm now using the 2 SSD's with the internal SATA II RAID.
Which SSDs and what are the performance?
avemestr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 02:52 AM   #68
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by allYcad View Post
Allright you guys, I got TWO of the Velocity Solo X2's and configured them with TWO 120GB Vertex3's, RAID0.

I then used DiskTester 2.4.0 64-bit and ran the sequential-suite test.

I've attached the full report.

Below is the averages...

--------------- Averages for "Vertex3" (4GB/start, 5 iterations) ---------------
Transfer Size Write MB/sec Read MB/sec
[LEFT][LEFT] 32K 301 292
64K 397 378
128K 501 486
256K 582 592
512K 648 655
1MB 651 704
2MB 687 813
4MB 757 890
8MB 800 968
16MB 836 997
32MB 849 1018
64MB 853 1022
128MB 852 1030
256MB 858 1031

Command "run-sequential-suite" executed in 915.74 seconds on Saturday, August 25, 2012 11:32:20 AM PT
Now that's worth writing home about!!!

I'd like to see the same benchmark on the OWC card.
__________________
tools: nMP for photography, rMBP for working, iPad for surfing, iPhone for communicating, Mac Mini for entertaining
Canon tools: 5D Mark III 24-105L/70-300L/35L/50L/85L for capturing
VirtualRain is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 11:06 AM   #69
matthewtoney
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post
Now that's worth writing home about!!!

I'd like to see the same benchmark on the OWC card.
Yes, but that's with the 2 SSDs on 2 X2s and the RAID0 across the cards. The other benchmarks listed (with both SSDs on the single X2) are not as great, but it seems like all of us using that setup are getting scores fairly close to what the other's see. Seems like each "drive" having its own full bandwidth to the X2 card makes a difference.
matthewtoney is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 11:55 AM   #70
Kierkegaard
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Made in Quebec
Time boot with Velocity Solo x2

Quote:
Originally Posted by rexie View Post
Just purchased this card. Installed into my 4,1 Mac Pro, no problems, boots up OK. No SSD boot time 57 sec, SDD connected to spare DVD cable 37s, SDD on PCI card 47s (time from pressing power button). Have the Intel 520 240GB SSD. Open to any performance tests you would like me to run if free app.
Cheers.
The boot time of my Mac Pro 2010, time from pressing power button , take 27 second in SATA II native and 37 second with Solo x2 . Therefore, the boot time with Solo x2 was 10 second more slower than the SATA II native. Anyone know why?

My SSD is a Plextor M3 256GB SATA III.

P.S.: Sorry for my english, I'm french.
Kierkegaard is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 12:24 PM   #71
El Awesome
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zurich
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kierkegaard View Post
The boot time of my Mac Pro 2010, time from pressing power button , take 27 second in SATA II native and 37 second with Solo x2 . Therefore, the boot time with Solo x2 was 10 second more slower than the SATA II native. Anyone know why?

My SSD is a Plextor M3 256GB SATA III.

P.S.: Sorry for my english, I'm french.
Maybe recognising the drive via a PCI-e slot takes 10sec longer than recognising it directly on the motherboard because PCI-e drivers have to be loaded first?
__________________
Hackintosh 3.5Ghz i7 3770k, 32 GB RAM, eVGA GTX 680 2048 MB SuperClocked, Samsung 830 128GB SSD
MacBook Pro Late '08 2.8 Ghz C2D, 4GB RAM, Nvidia 9400M & 9600M GT
El Awesome is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 01:05 PM   #72
Kierkegaard
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Made in Quebec
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Awesome View Post
Maybe recognising the drive via a PCI-e slot takes 10sec longer than recognising it directly on the motherboard because PCI-e drivers have to be loaded first?
Yes, it's possible and also regrettable.

Thank you.
Kierkegaard is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 01:18 PM   #73
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewtoney View Post
Yes, but that's with the 2 SSDs on 2 X2s and the RAID0 across the cards. The other benchmarks listed (with both SSDs on the single X2) are not as great, but it seems like all of us using that setup are getting scores fairly close to what the other's see. Seems like each "drive" having its own full bandwidth to the X2 card makes a difference.
Yeah... It definitely indicates that the x2 interface or some other logic on the card (most likely) is the bottleneck.

If you have two empty slots this seems to be the fastest way to run two SATA3 SSDs in RAID0. The only solution that might be faster is a $500 RAID card. This is even faster than the OWC card, and it's cheaper and more flexible in that you can choose and upgrade your drives.
__________________
tools: nMP for photography, rMBP for working, iPad for surfing, iPhone for communicating, Mac Mini for entertaining
Canon tools: 5D Mark III 24-105L/70-300L/35L/50L/85L for capturing
VirtualRain is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 07:11 PM   #74
matthewtoney
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post
Yeah... It definitely indicates that the x2 interface or some other logic on the card (most likely) is the bottleneck.

If you have two empty slots this seems to be the fastest way to run two SATA3 SSDs in RAID0. The only solution that might be faster is a $500 RAID card. This is even faster than the OWC card, and it's cheaper and more flexible in that you can choose and upgrade your drives.
Agreed. In truth I'm satisfied with what I'm getting out of the 2 SSDs on the single X2 card - I think its easily worth the $100.
matthewtoney is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2012, 08:14 PM   #75
letscopro
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by allYcad View Post
Now this is just one of the Velocity Solo X2 cards configured with both of my 120GB Vertex3's.

Once again, running DiskTester 2.4.0 64-bit and the sequential-suite test.

I've attached the full report.

Below is the averages, pretty good actually...


--------------- Averages for "Vertex3" (4GB/start, 5 iterations) ---------------
Transfer Size Write MB/sec Read MB/sec
32K 263 257
64K 319 340
128K 388 428
256K 435 501
512K 441 518
1MB 461 562
2MB 495 631
4MB 525 674
8MB 541 710
16MB 550 723
32MB 552 734
64MB 555 738
128MB 557 741
256MB 551 744

Command "run-sequential-suite" executed in 1199.74 seconds on Saturday, August 25, 2012 12:22:52 PM PT
How did you get power to the second SSD?
letscopro is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apricorn Velocity V2 solo in 2012 MP Marty62 Mac Pro 13 Feb 27, 2014 02:37 PM
Resolved: Velocity Solo x1 and BootCamp NOTNlCE Mac Pro 31 Jan 4, 2014 02:52 AM
AHCI bootcamp with Velocity solo x2 Gav Mack Mac Pro 52 Dec 23, 2013 06:45 AM
Velocity Solo X2 - Two SSD's costabunny Mac Pro 22 Nov 22, 2013 06:46 PM
Velocity solo x2 boot issue pyzon Mac Pro 26 Sep 25, 2013 08:09 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:11 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC