Jump to content


Photo

Intel SSD 520 RAID Review Discussion


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Kevin OBrien

Kevin OBrien

    StorageReview Editor

  • Admin
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:31 AM

Last but not least, we look at the Intel SSD 520 in RAID0, RAID0x3 and RAID5.

Intel SSD 520 RAID Review

#2 ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

    Member

  • Member
  • 5 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 03:05 PM

Last but not least, we look at the Intel SSD 520 in RAID0, RAID0x3 and RAID5.

Intel SSD 520 RAID Review

Excellent review.

Did you get the 50 second warm-boot delay with the Intel 520 SSD in the Lenovo W520 (as is the case with the Lenovo W520 + Intel 510 SSD).

Edited by ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO, 06 February 2012 - 03:06 PM.

#3 Kevin OBrien

Kevin OBrien

    StorageReview Editor

  • Admin
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 03:10 PM

Excellent review.

Did you get the 50 second warm-boot delay with the Intel 520 SSD in the Lenovo W520 (as is the case with the Lenovo W520 + Intel 510 SSD).


We haven't noticed that fault on our review unit. We can reclone the drives to put it through some more reboot scenarios if you would like though.

#4 ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

    Member

  • Member
  • 5 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 03:46 PM

We haven't noticed that fault on our review unit. We can reclone the drives to put it through some more reboot scenarios if you would like though.


That would be great if you could test the "warm-reboot" scenario with the Intel 520 SSD in the Lenovo W520.

Lenovo BIOS engineers are aware of the 50 second warm-boot delay issue with the Intel 510 SSD (which occurs both in single drive and RAID setups), but have not been able to fix it yet.

Edited by ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO, 06 February 2012 - 03:56 PM.

#5 Kevin OBrien

Kevin OBrien

    StorageReview Editor

  • Admin
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 04:00 PM

That might have been related to the Marvell controller in the 510, which would have been completely different than the SF-2200 controller in the SSD 520.

#6 MySchizoBuddy

MySchizoBuddy

    Member

  • Member
  • 20 posts

Posted 23 February 2012 - 07:31 PM

newbie question what do you mean by queue depth?

Edited by MySchizoBuddy, 23 February 2012 - 07:36 PM.

#7 ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

    Member

  • Member
  • 5 posts

Posted 23 February 2012 - 07:42 PM

newbie question what do you mean by queue depth?


Yes, I am curious about that too.

queue depth is defined as "outstanding I/O" in Wiki, but I don't quite get how one would know how many outstanding I/Os there are and wouldn't be there fewer outstanding I/Os with a faster SSD?

#8 Kevin OBrien

Kevin OBrien

    StorageReview Editor

  • Admin
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 24 February 2012 - 10:11 AM

Yes, I am curious about that too.

queue depth is defined as "outstanding I/O" in Wiki, but I don't quite get how one would know how many outstanding I/Os there are and wouldn't be there fewer outstanding I/Os with a faster SSD?


Well that plays into it since a faster SSD can plow through its workload at a greater place. The I/O speed and latency actually play hand in hand when measuring queue depth speeds. Higher queue depth to a certain point the I/O speed will remain the same but the latency will skyrocket.

#9 ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

    Member

  • Member
  • 5 posts

Posted 25 February 2012 - 06:01 PM

That might have been related to the Marvell controller in the 510, which would have been completely different than the SF-2200 controller in the SSD 520.


The Sandisk Extreme (announced Feb 2012), which uses the SandForce controller http://pcworldpc.blo...-explained.html has the same 40 sec delay issue:

http://forums.lenovo...p/690721#M25106

Therefore the Lenovo W520 40 sec delay does not have anything to do with the SSD controller being used.

Lenovo is aware of the issue (which has been reported 9 months ago), but has not yet fixed it.

#10 MySchizoBuddy

MySchizoBuddy

    Member

  • Member
  • 20 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 03:10 AM

do you see a linear increase in performance when going from 2,4,8,16 RAID SSDs. Can you do a benchmark regarding this.

#11 Kevin OBrien

Kevin OBrien

    StorageReview Editor

  • Admin
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 12:22 PM

The Sandisk Extreme (announced Feb 2012), which uses the SandForce controller http://pcworldpc.blo...-explained.html has the same 40 sec delay issue:

http://forums.lenovo...p/690721#M25106

Therefore the Lenovo W520 40 sec delay does not have anything to do with the SSD controller being used.

Lenovo is aware of the issue (which has been reported 9 months ago), but has not yet fixed it.


Yikes, I wonder then if there are any SSDs reported that don't exhibit that behavior.

#12 ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

ThinkpadW520-Intel510RaidO

    Member

  • Member
  • 5 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 01:01 PM

Yikes, I wonder then if there are any SSDs reported that don't exhibit that behavior.


So far I only know of the Intel 510 and the SanDisk Extreme that exhibit that behavior.

Intel 320, OCZ, Crucial M4 etc work fine.

#13 SamK

SamK

    Member

  • Member
  • 13 posts

Posted 24 July 2012 - 06:43 PM

Can someone explain why the RAID0/3 drive result showed nearly zero improvement in read/write? This was very strange to me.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users