2008 Mac Pro Samsung Spintpoint Raid Benchmarks

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Mr.PS, Feb 14, 2008.

  1. Mr.PS macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #1
    The picture says it all, and no - I, nor the readers of this thread do not want to be bored with lectures about raid and increased failure statistics... We all know the risks, backups are a must, with or without raid.

    the array is compromised of two 750gb Samsung Spinpoint f1 32mb cache hdd's.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. bigbossbmb macrumors 68000

    bigbossbmb

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    Pasadena/Hollywood
    #2
    well, no...the picture doesn't say it all.

    how about a comparison of the 2 samsungs in RAID0 vs the samsungs by themselves. all you did was compare them to the slow stock drive that everyone knows is slow.
     
  3. Mr.PS thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #3
    Well my comparison was stock vs samsung array. I didn't have time to bench mark them individually, although it would be a good benchmark. This shows how much faster raided sammys are over the stock hdd. I think this is a good benchmark and eye opener as well.
     
  4. bigbossbmb macrumors 68000

    bigbossbmb

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    Pasadena/Hollywood
    #4
    yes, but you're not actually showing what the benefit of the RAID is. everyone knows the stock drive is a dog. comparing single drive to single drive is an effective benchmark and showing unRAID'd vs RAID'd drives (of the same make) is an effective benchmark.

    There's no real way (from your test) to see how much of the improvement is the difference of the drive or the addition of RAID. It's like comparing a Supercharged Mustang to a stock Civic. Of course the Mustang is faster, but you don't know how much is the car and how much is the supercharger.
     
  5. Mr.PS thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #5
    That I agree with, this benchmark will be most beneficial to those looking to run a Sammy raid over the stock drive. That was my intended purpose. That's what I went for at first, I never considered a single sammy, just a raided sammy setup.

    lol @ sammys. Reminds me of this burger joint around here .
     
  6. eyecool macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    #6
    Can anyone else with a Samsung F1 post the single drive benchmarks?

    After seeing how well it did in RAID 0, I may return my unopened F1 1TB to newegg and get 3x750gb for a raid 5.

    Damn, or maybe 2x750's raid 0 and keep the 1tb for backups.

    Maybe I should quit worrying about raids and get upgrade one of my old, viewsonic lcds... decisions decisions.
     
  7. viltsu macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #7
    Do you have a RAID-card or just the software RAID?
     
  8. Mr.PS thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #8
    I say keep the 1tb for backups/time machine. That's what I'm using the stock 320gb drive for. I would like to see a single sammy benchmark as well too!

    Software raid...
     
  9. ansalmo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 23, 2005
    #9
    The "pre-raid" test looks incomplete - you're missing the random uncached read (256K blocks) score, which would cause the overall score to be artificially lowered too. Do you have a full set of data for comparison?
     
  10. Mr.PS thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #10
    Actually, I noticed that too, I let it run and it appeared to finish, thus allowing me to save the result. I'd really have no reason to forge any of these numbers. The stock drive was more then enough, I just wanted some more juice for video/audio and loading of plugins/programs, etc..
     
  11. gazfocus macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #11
    Also bear in mind that the OP has considerably more RAM in the RAID setup...not sure if this would impact on the results?
     
  12. Mr.PS thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #12
    I added more ram, yes, I forgot to mention that.
     
  13. johny5 macrumors 6502a

    johny5

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #13
    Ok here is the Samsung F1 750gb in a single configuration: (I do have 10gb ram and its in a Mac Pro 8 core 2.8ghz)
     

    Attached Files:

  14. Woodburn macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Location:
    Danville, CA
    #14
    Thanks for sharing this info, Mr. PS, it's very helpful. So, how did you migrate the OS and files from the 320GB drive over to the RAID?

    Thanks!
     
  15. dukeblue91 macrumors 65816

    dukeblue91

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    #15
    That's quite an improvement :eek:
    I got a 56.28 score on my HD test.
    I'm waiting on my Samsung F1 750gb it should be here some time today.
     
  16. Just sayin... macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #16
    Here's my benchmark with one of the 1TB Samsung HD's. Not too different from that of the 750GB F1's.

    2.8X8/8800/10GB
     

    Attached Files:

  17. johny5 macrumors 6502a

    johny5

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    Indeed :D I was thoroughly impressed with the big improvement over the stock drive and I can only thank people on here after all the discussions about them.
     
  18. bigbossbmb macrumors 68000

    bigbossbmb

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    Pasadena/Hollywood
    #18
    I don't know, a 15MB/s increase in sequential write is pretty significant.
     
  19. Jonny427 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    #19
    Thanks for the test Johny, there is quite an improvement with raid 0... so much that I almost want to do it :)
     
  20. benpatient macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    #20
    as long as you do backups (you do do backups, don't you?), RAID 0 is hard to beat.
     
  21. Just sayin... macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    #21
    Isn't that what Time Machine is for? You know, to help offset the risks associated with running a RAID 0 configuration...
     
  22. viltsu macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #22
    Samsung F1 750GB:
     

    Attached Files:

  23. Mr.PS thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
  24. mastercam macrumors newbie

    mastercam

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    #24
    What about the Accesstime?
    IMHO it is more important for fast Program Startup.
    RAID 0 slows a little bit the Accestime.
    Does NCQ work in a RAID 0 Configuration?

    Greetz
     
  25. imacdaddy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    #25
    may I ask what app you used for these benchmarks?
     

Share This Page