Sequential Read/Write Speed

Using the 6-22-2008 build of Iometer I ran a 3 minute long 128KB sequential test over the entire span of the drive. The results reported are in average MB/s over the entire test length. All requests are 4K aligned.

Iometer - 128KB Sequential Read

The Intel ICH10R controller actually offers better performance here by a good amount. Even the old Z-Drive m84 is a bit faster than the new Revo, perhaps due to the use of four controllers in RAID-0 on that drive.

Iometer - 128KB Sequential Write

Write performance is a similar story. The two Vertex 2s in RAID-0 are faster thanks to Intel’s highly optimized RAID controller. The RevoDrive is still no slouch and what we’ll look at next is the real world impact of these results.

Installation and Early Issues Random Read/Write Speed
Comments Locked

62 Comments

View All Comments

  • nurd - Saturday, June 26, 2010 - link

    The SiI 3124 is just a standard SATA controller; the RAID is software.

    And not everybody uses drivers written by Silicon Image, or for Windows :)
  • Nomgle - Monday, July 5, 2010 - link

    Erm, that's completely wrong - i suggest you read this review again, and pay careful attention to the RAID-setup screenshots...

    The Silicon Image 3124 used on this card, IS a RAID controller, and does require drivers.
  • vol7ron - Friday, June 25, 2010 - link

    "The PCIe x8 card was made up of four Indilinx barefoot controllers configured in RAID-0, delivering up to four times the performance of a single Indilinx SSD but on a single card."

    Is this something that you witnessed?

    When you have 4 channels of RAID-0, I thought the performance was more exponential. 2 drives/memory chips in parallel may be twice the performance, but 3 drives would be more like 4+ times times the performance.

    I think having the daughter board would really change things.

    Also, doesn't Intel have a TRIM driver for their RAID controller?

    vol7ron
  • Mr Perfect - Friday, June 25, 2010 - link

    It should be linear growth, minus overhead.

    Performance would have to be additive. Three drives can't be four times the performance of one drive. If one drive achieves 55.7MB/s, then you could theoretically get 55.7x3=167.1MB/s from three or 55.7x4=222.8MB/s from four. Considering each drive will only ever be able to put out 55.7MB/s, then how could three achieve 222.8 total? Dividing the 222.8MB/s by 3 would give you 74.2 MB/s output from each drive, when they are physically only capable of 55.7MB/s each. The math would get even wonkier as you scaled higher up the exponential curve.
  • kmmatney - Friday, June 25, 2010 - link

    You really need to include SSDs and hard drives in the Benchmarks feature of this website. It would really help for people upgrading from older drives, such as first gen drives, or other drives that you wouldn't be able to inlucde in teh benchamrks for every single review.
  • knowom - Friday, June 25, 2010 - link

    I'm still waiting on a modern I-Ram priced reasonably with PCI-E bandwidth with a flash card slot for data retention preferably accessible from the PCI-E retention bracket for convenient access and ability to make it hot swappable and DDR3 dimm slots angled diagonally so you could fit more dimm slots and the manufacturer could fit more easily by elongating the PCB like with video cards as well.

    How a modern I-Ram device would be done ideally
    except angled more optimally for capacity in mind
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    | | dimm slots |
    | Flash | / / / / / / / / |
    | | / / / / / / / / |
    | ---------------- / / / / / / / / |
    | / / / / / / / / |
    | PCI-E / / / / / / / / |
    --------__________-------------------------------------------
  • iwodo - Saturday, June 26, 2010 - link

    Until SandForce SATA 3.0 version of Controller comes out. It will be faster then Revo.

    The Next Mile Stone is 1GB/s, while making it stays the same price........
  • sunshine - Saturday, June 26, 2010 - link

    Regarding the 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300:

    This 64 GB version of this SSD, has a much slower write speed than the 256 GB version.

    Write speeds vary with capacity:

    70MB/s for the 64GB model, 140MB for 128GB and 215MB/s for the 256GB.

    So apparently there is a trade off, lower price, but lower speed as well.
  • lukeevanssi - Saturday, June 26, 2010 - link

    I am thinking of buying a E-revo 1/16 scale. I was wondering how well does this truck drive on grass if i put dual battery packs on it?. Can it climb well on dirt mounds? Thanks
    if anybody want to know more about it so plz visit this link:-
    http://www.healthproductreviewers.com/force-factor...
    there is a lot off knowledge about this product
  • 529th - Saturday, June 26, 2010 - link

    My Vertex LE died about 2 weeks ago.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now