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 27, 2012, 03:58 AM   #76
Boomhowler
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
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?
You have to enable read/write on the boot drive for the user you are using. It is disabled by default.

Right click on the boot drive, choose "info". At the bottom of the info frame you can add users and what they are allowed to do.
Boomhowler is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2012, 09:48 AM   #77
phpmaven
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA USA
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.
Actually with my Accelsior the boot time increased significantly from booting off a single SSD in a standard drive sled. It must have something to do with it being in a PCI slot.
phpmaven is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2012, 10:05 AM   #78
matthewtoney
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boomhowler View Post
You have to enable read/write on the boot drive for the user you are using. It is disabled by default.

Right click on the boot drive, choose "info". At the bottom of the info frame you can add users and what they are allowed to do.
Hah!!! Where have you been - I've been wondering for ages why I couldn't get the darn AJA test to run on my RAID0 boot drive.

Write: 572.6
Read: 670.1

Pretty similar scores to what I saw with xBench (2 Crucial M4 256gb SSD both on the X2)
matthewtoney is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2012, 11:52 AM   #79
Kierkegaard
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Made in Quebec
Boot time with Solo x2

Quote:
Originally Posted by phpmaven View Post
Actually with my Accelsior the boot time increased significantly from booting off a single SSD in a standard drive sled. It must have something to do with it being in a PCI slot.
It is regrettable that boot time with Solo x2 is more slower than the native SATA II, about 10 second more slower with Solo x2. My boot disk is however well selected through system preferences.

I have submitted this problem to the technical support from Apricorn and they do not have the solution.
Kierkegaard is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2012, 12:29 PM   #80
matthewtoney
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kierkegaard View Post
It is regrettable that boot time with Solo x2 is more slower than the native SATA II, about 10 second more slower with Solo x2. My boot disk is however well selected through system preferences.

I have submitted this problem to the technical support from Apricorn and they do not have the solution.
I've seen the same, and it seems to be the added time the mac takes to scan the PCI bus - see the bootable SATA controller and then whatever time the X2 takes to scan/check the drives before the booting starts. (if you boot this thing up in windows, you can see the bios-boot info that the X2 throws up displaying attached drives, etc.)

I don't think there IS any real way around this with the X2, although boot times were not something I felt like I needed improvement on so its not bothering me.
matthewtoney is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2012, 12:56 PM   #81
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewtoney View Post
Hah!!! Where have you been - I've been wondering for ages why I couldn't get the darn AJA test to run on my RAID0 boot drive.

Write: 572.6
Read: 670.1

Pretty similar scores to what I saw with xBench (2 Crucial M4 256gb SSD both on the X2)
That's great you finally got this sorted... and respectable performance.

Q: (for anyone) has there been any issues or delays resuming from sleep?
__________________
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 offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2012, 01:57 PM   #82
phpmaven
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kierkegaard View Post
It is regrettable that boot time with Solo x2 is more slower than the native SATA II, about 10 second more slower with Solo x2. My boot disk is however well selected through system preferences.

I have submitted this problem to the technical support from Apricorn and they do not have the solution.
It's more of just a curiosity for me. I leave my Mac running 24/7, so it doesn't really matter much to me.
phpmaven is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2012, 04:52 PM   #83
matthewtoney
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post
That's great you finally got this sorted... and respectable performance.

Q: (for anyone) has there been any issues or delays resuming from sleep?
I let mine put the monitors and the drives to sleep but I don't let it put the pro itself in sleep mode - I haven't had any trouble but I'm assuming that's what you're really asking about.
matthewtoney is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:38 AM   #84
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewtoney View Post
I let mine put the monitors and the drives to sleep but I don't let it put the pro itself in sleep mode - I haven't had any trouble but I'm assuming that's what you're really asking about.
I put my MP to sleep when I'm not using it... I just wonder if the machine has trouble waking from sleep when the system drive is on one of these cards.
__________________
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 offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:52 AM   #85
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.
Ok with the Intel 520 240GB SSD as boot drive on the x2 only got:
write 451 MB/s
read 467MB/s
rexie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 09:39 AM   #86
Kierkegaard
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Made in Quebec
Speed limit of the Solo x2 in current use

While this Solo x2 card announces transfer rates up to 550MB/s in both read and write, I doubt a single SSD SATA III will ever reach 500MB/s in sequential read with this card.

However, a Crucial M4 128GB can easily reach, since the firmware update build 0009, the 500MB/s in sequential read with incompressible data.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPnlpF3sLtI

I have not seen a case on this thread, a single SSD approaching the 500MB/s in sequential read, specially with incompressible data.

In fact, I'd be curious to know how fast this Solo x2 saturated with sequential read and write with incompressible data. I doubt it will ever reach 500MB/s and 400MB/s in read and write.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Capture d’écran 2012-08-28 à 10.14.28.png
Views:	92
Size:	296.0 KB
ID:	354864  

Last edited by Kierkegaard; Aug 28, 2012 at 09:47 AM.
Kierkegaard is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 01:16 PM   #87
derbothaus
macrumors 601
 
derbothaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by rexie View Post
Ok with the Intel 520 240GB SSD as boot drive on the x2 only got:
write 451 MB/s
read 467MB/s
Depends on the options and test settings and how full the drive is. My OWC 6G which is slower just got 503 Read, 483 Write. The speed of the 520 is much more about the balanced firmware and iOPS and response and fast 4K writes. You wont notice 467MB/s vs 500MB/s anyway really.
__________________
Mac Pro W3680, GTX 680, 12GB DDR3, SSD; MBP, 2.6GHz Core i7, 16GB DDR3, SSD; Eizo fs2333
derbothaus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 02:55 PM   #88
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kierkegaard View Post
While this Solo x2 card announces transfer rates up to 550MB/s in both read and write, I doubt a single SSD SATA III will ever reach 500MB/s in sequential read with this card.

However, a Crucial M4 128GB can easily reach, since the firmware update build 0009, the 500MB/s in sequential read with incompressible data.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPnlpF3sLtI

I have not seen a case on this thread, a single SSD approaching the 500MB/s in sequential read, specially with incompressible data.

In fact, I'd be curious to know how fast this Solo x2 saturated with sequential read and write with incompressible data. I doubt it will ever reach 500MB/s and 400MB/s in read and write.
The nature of the data (incompressible or not) will not impact Read speeds on SSD's. That will only affect write performance and only on SandForce-based SSD's.

Almost all current gen SSD's can achieve 500MB/s Reads on SATA3 (M4, 830, 520, Vertex 4, etc.) so we would expect them to perform to that level with this card. However, as you point out, many are not, so it's possible there is some bottleneck on the card, the PCIe bus, or the way Intel handles it in the ICH. And the bottleneck is even more apparent when you connect two drives in RAID0 to this card.

So far the way to ultimate performance seems to be to buy two of these cards, use a single SSD on each, and RAID0 the pair. Member allYcad was able to achieve 1GB/s Read's this way
__________________
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 28, 2012 at 03:00 PM.
VirtualRain is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 03:43 PM   #89
Kierkegaard
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Made in Quebec
Quote:
Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post
The nature of the data (incompressible or not) will not impact Read speeds on SSD's. That will only affect write performance and only on SandForce-based SSD's.

Almost all current gen SSD's can achieve 500MB/s Reads on SATA3 (M4, 830, 520, Vertex 4, etc.) so we would expect them to perform to that level with this card. However, as you point out, many are not, so it's possible there is some bottleneck on the card, the PCIe bus, or the way Intel handles it in the ICH. And the bottleneck is even more apparent when you connect two drives in RAID0 to this card.

So far the way to ultimate performance seems to be to buy two of these cards, use a single SSD on each, and RAID0 the pair. Member allYcad was able to achieve 1GB/s Read's this way
En effet, tu as parfaitement raison. Le traitement des données incompressibles affectent celles en écriture et non celles en lecture. Quant aux SSD les plus touchés par les données incompressibles, ce sont ceux qui sont dotés d'un contrôleur SandForce, comme tu l'as si bien souligné.

Cela dit, je doute fort qu'un seul SSD via la Solo X2 puisse jamais atteindre les 500MB/s en lecture. C'est une bonne carte mais elle ne remplacera jamais le SATA III natif, comme chacun sait.

Last edited by Kierkegaard; Aug 28, 2012 at 03:50 PM.
Kierkegaard is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 05:48 PM   #90
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kierkegaard View Post
En effet, tu as parfaitement raison. Le traitement des données incompressibles affectent celles en écriture et non celles en lecture. Quant aux SSD les plus touchés par les données incompressibles, ce sont ceux qui sont dotés d'un contrôleur SandForce, comme tu l'as si bien souligné.

Cela dit, je doute fort qu'un seul SSD via la Solo X2 puisse jamais atteindre les 500MB/s en lecture. C'est une bonne carte mais elle ne remplacera jamais le SATA III natif, comme chacun sait.
C'est ce que je pensais aussi, mais allYcad a posté ses repères montrant une paire de Vertex3 atteindre 1000+ MB/s en 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 offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 07:48 PM   #91
derbothaus
macrumors 601
 
derbothaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
I thought the british and french did not get along.
__________________
Mac Pro W3680, GTX 680, 12GB DDR3, SSD; MBP, 2.6GHz Core i7, 16GB DDR3, SSD; Eizo fs2333
derbothaus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 08:03 PM   #92
tuxon86
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by derbothaus View Post
I thought the british and french did not get along.
Never heard of the "entente cordiale"?
tuxon86 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 2012, 09:34 PM   #93
Kierkegaard
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Made in Quebec
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
Et ton OWC Mercury Accelsior PCI Express SSD 480GB, quelle vitesse réussit-il à atteindre en lecture et en écriture avec l'application Blackmagic Disk Speed Test? Je pose la question parce que j'aimerais savoir comment il assure avec les données incompressibles.
Kierkegaard is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 09:26 AM   #94
phpmaven
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA USA
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
Can you do an AJA test on that? I'de like to compare it to the performance of my Accelsior, but I don't want to buy Disktester to do it. I suspect that many of those numbers you got will be much higher than the AJA test.
phpmaven is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 02:44 PM   #95
derbothaus
macrumors 601
 
derbothaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxon86 View Post
Never heard of the "entente cordiale"?
I'm from the US, of course not. We are terrible historians and only teach our children that everyone else is inferior
But I do now. Thanks.
My comment was more Quebec vs. Ontario vs. BC. Which socially is still very much an issue. It was also very tongue in cheek.
__________________
Mac Pro W3680, GTX 680, 12GB DDR3, SSD; MBP, 2.6GHz Core i7, 16GB DDR3, SSD; Eizo fs2333
derbothaus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 08:23 PM   #96
tuxon86
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by derbothaus View Post
I'm from the US, of course not. We are terrible historians and only teach our children that everyone else is inferior
But I do now. Thanks.
My comment was more Quebec vs. Ontario vs. BC. Which socially is still very much an issue. It was also very tongue in cheek.
I know that it was... I just forgot about inserting a smiley at the end
tuxon86 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 08:28 PM   #97
allYcad
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Not ONE, Not TWO, but THREE Velocity Solo X2's each with 120GB Vertex3's...

Quote:
Originally Posted by phpmaven View Post
Can you do an AJA test on that? I'de like to compare it to the performance of my Accelsior, but I don't want to buy Disktester to do it. I suspect that many of those numbers you got will be much higher than the AJA test.
Here you go, I added a third card, just for fun. Here's the Disktester number's...

--------------- Averages for "Vertex3" (4GB/start, 5 iterations) ---------------
Transfer Size Write MB/sec Read MB/sec
32K 230 208
64K 329 306
128K 441 407
256K 622 610
512K 771 784
1MB 911 947
2MB 933 1038
4MB 1039 1193
8MB 1123 1324
16MB 1172 1439
32MB 1214 1489
64MB 1233 1528
128MB 1012 1540
256MB 1224 1548

Command "run-sequential-suite" executed in 894.47 seconds on Monday, August 27, 2012 10:05:09 AM PT

and the AJA numbers for each.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	AjaVelocitySoloX2.jpg
Views:	133
Size:	149.6 KB
ID:	355082  
allYcad is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 10:43 PM   #98
hfg
macrumors 68020
 
hfg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA.
Several posters in this thread have mentioned that the Velocity Solo X2 will not boot in a 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 computer. Checking the Apricorn web page for this produce seems to indicate that it does boot on a 2008 Mac Pro.

Is this something that has recently been upgraded?

http://www.apricorn.com/products/des...el-solox2.html

MAC PRO
The Velocity Solo x2 will function in all Mac Pro models, but will only boot in EFI64 machines which are the last 3 models known as Mac Pro 3,1 4,1 and 5,1 Your Mac model can be found by doing an "About This Mac", and then "More Info". The first two models known as Mac Pro1,1 and 2,1 are EFI32 so won't boot from the Velocity Solo x2, but will function as high performance storage.



-howard
hfg is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 11:46 PM   #99
phpmaven
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfg View Post
Several posters in this thread have mentioned that the Velocity Solo X2 will not boot in a 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 computer. Checking the Apricorn web page for this produce seems to indicate that it does boot on a 2008 Mac Pro.

Is this something that has recently been upgraded?

http://www.apricorn.com/products/des...el-solox2.html

MAC PRO
The Velocity Solo x2 will function in all Mac Pro models, but will only boot in EFI64 machines which are the last 3 models known as Mac Pro 3,1 4,1 and 5,1 Your Mac model can be found by doing an "About This Mac", and then "More Info". The first two models known as Mac Pro1,1 and 2,1 are EFI32 so won't boot from the Velocity Solo x2, but will function as high performance storage.



-howard
I just did a bit of searching and it could be that the comment Iv'e seen on several product pages "The 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 is EFI64 but does not boot reliably, and therefore is not supported" might be in reference to the Solo X1, even though I've seen that on pages selling the X2. I guess some brave soul will have to give it a shot.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by allYcad View Post
Here you go, I added a third card, just for fun. Here's the Disktester number's...

--------------- Averages for "Vertex3" (4GB/start, 5 iterations) ---------------
Transfer Size Write MB/sec Read MB/sec
32K 230 208
64K 329 306
128K 441 407
256K 622 610
512K 771 784
1MB 911 947
2MB 933 1038
4MB 1039 1193
8MB 1123 1324
16MB 1172 1439
32MB 1214 1489
64MB 1233 1528
128MB 1012 1540
256MB 1224 1548

Command "run-sequential-suite" executed in 894.47 seconds on Monday, August 27, 2012 10:05:09 AM PT

and the AJA numbers for each.
Pretty impressive.
phpmaven is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2012, 11:49 PM   #100
hfg
macrumors 68020
 
hfg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phpmaven View Post
I just did a bit of searching and it could be that the comment Iv'e seen on several product pages "The 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 is EFI64 but does not boot reliably, and therefore is not supported" might be in reference to the Solo X1, even though I've seen that on pages selling the X2. I guess some brave soul will have to give it a shot.
I have seen that too ... it is even on the Amazon description for the Solo X2 (unavailable). I even thought I had seen it on the Apricorn web site recently, but it sure indicates that the 2008 Mac Pro is compatible now. I think I may try one...



-howard
hfg 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 AM.

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

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