Brian

40 SSD RAID Is pretty fast - 155,000 IOPS/s

Recommended Posts

Dear Lord...Patriot is showing of a system at CeBIT that they claim is the fastest system on the planet...hard to argue when you consider the rig. 40 256GB TorqX SSDs connected to five LSI SAS PCI-E controllers. The net result is a sustained rate of 155,000 IOPS/s. Real world? The machine can copy a ripped Blu-ray file in .9 seconds...yeah, that's fast.

post-69523-12676510587692_thumb.jpg

From TechPowerUp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all those sata cables reminds me of my old 48 raptor setup with arecas

such a mess! I would use expanders and like 5 ml cables tops

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that is the point. No one needs this, it's total geek excess. I think that's what makes it fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is though - who needs that...

There has to be a point where one says its starting to become nonsensical - and this is one of them.

Actually there are real-world uses for these types of systems. Movie development. The latest CGI development on Avatar was pretty insane when they were talking about the disc space per minute of video, networked computers for rendering, and all that jazz. On-site HD recording it also a big deal these days as cameras get better and dump out higher bitrate video.

http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/01/avatar-takes-1-petabyte-storage-space-equivalent-32-year-long-mp3/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, but with Cameron's what, $500 million budget, I guess they could afford a few of these rigs. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually there are real-world uses for these types of systems. Movie development. The latest CGI development on Avatar was pretty insane when they were talking about the disc space per minute of video, networked computers for rendering, and all that jazz. On-site HD recording it also a big deal these days as cameras get better and dump out higher bitrate video.

http://thenextweb.com/2010/01/01/avatar-takes-1-petabyte-storage-space-equivalent-32-year-long-mp3/

Yes, but how much do you need?

I can understand someone raiding 2, 3 maybe even 4 Intel SSDs - but 40 is beyond my understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but how much do you need?

I can understand someone raiding 2, 3 maybe even 4 Intel SSDs - but 40 is beyond my understanding.

Here is a rough calculation on 1920x1080 video uncompressed as it would probably be coming out of the camera (indy film stuff... big budget would be 4K or IMAX resolution):

Moving image

Pixel rate: 51.84 MHz

Uncompressed bitrate: 1.24 Gbps (standard SI-units)

= 155.52 MB/s

1.2 Gibps (1024-based)

(rgb444, 8 bits/comp, 25fps)

Required storage:

(uncompressed)

1 second: 155.52 MB 148.3 MiB

30 seconds: 4.67 GB 4.3 GiB

1 minute: 9.33 GB 8.7 GiB

5 minutes: 46.66 GB 43.5 GiB

1 hour: 559.87 GB 521.4 GiB

24 hours: 13.44 TB 12.2 TiB

I guess it comes down to redundant local storage to capture the video as it feeds in chunks (probably not shooting the entire move at one time) and lots and lots of fast scratch space in the editing phases. Moving that data around is going to be the biggest problem when doing full movie renders. A handful of SSD's won't cut it... probably not even a crate-full.

EDIT: LOL WOW... bitrate stuff for 4096x2016 video

Moving image

Pixel rate: 221.18 MHz

Uncompressed bitrate: 5.31 Gbps (standard SI-units)

= 663.55 MB/s

4.9 Gibps (1024-based)

(rgb444, 8 bits/comp, 25fps)

Required storage:

(uncompressed)

1 second: 663.55 MB 632.8 MiB

30 seconds: 19.91 GB 18.5 GiB

1 minute: 39.81 GB 37.1 GiB

5 minutes: 199.07 GB 185.4 GiB

1 hour: 2.39 TB 2.2 TiB

24 hours: 57.33 TB 52.1 TiB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK....

So why not use HDDs?

I know, much much slower, but far more cost effective...

Also, you're forgetting, video isn't really a lot of random reads and writes, is it?

There are quite a few sequential writes when you work with such large amounts of data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not Peter Jackson or James Cameron... I was just giving an example where it might come in handy :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I'm not Peter Jackson or James Cameron... I was just giving an example where it might come in handy :P

Have you actually noticed that most of the best films are comparatively cheap and are mainly played by little know actors?

That's the problem with modern industry... you just throw money at things... and then do nonsense like the setup above...

I don't know if you saw it on Endgadget ages ago - about a setup in which 9 or so graphics cards work together to create a little supercomputer - however, they had a specific use for it in a university for tomography and building 3d images - i.e. madly powerful device with a dedicated use - and cheaper than a "normal supercomputer".

This... its just to show off... and possibly not really performance friendly, because I have this slight feeling that random reads and writes aren't going to be perfect and they just went for "top speed" that nobody cares about anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure it would be faster with those top dog ARECA controllers.

K-TRON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to ask "why" and "who needs it". It's a tech demo. People do it all the time - show people what's possible and someone will probably find a use / market for it. Or just keep it in mind when they go shopping next time ;)

MrS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now