|
|
P4C800 Deluxe & SATA problem
Installed two drives on Windows XP Pro PC (P4C800 Deluxe) using the
onboard Intel ICH5 SATA controller (not the Promise controller). Didn't have to do the "F6" routine on install as XP recognized the SATA drives. Here is my question: In device manager, C (WD740 raptor boot drive) and D (Seagate 160) both show as 3rd and 4th master and there are two instances of "eide controllers" (DVD and CDRoms are on the regular ide controllers 1 and 2). In the BIOS the drives show as UDMA-6 (on boot- up), but windows shows them as UDMA-5. I am not running RAID, just 2 SATA drives. Are the drives running at the full 150 speed or are they being limited to regular Ultra ATA drives because they are connected to the ICH5 controller? I get a different answer from everyone I ask. Should I move the drives to the Fastrack controller to "insure" I'm getting the right performance or leave them as is? Again, no RAID. Thanks for anyone who can give me the answer. |
In article , R. Marshall
Chew wrote: Installed two drives on Windows XP Pro PC (P4C800 Deluxe) using the onboard Intel ICH5 SATA controller (not the Promise controller). Didn't have to do the "F6" routine on install as XP recognized the SATA drives. Here is my question: In device manager, C (WD740 raptor boot drive) and D (Seagate 160) both show as 3rd and 4th master and there are two instances of "eide controllers" (DVD and CDRoms are on the regular ide controllers 1 and 2). In the BIOS the drives show as UDMA-6 (on boot- up), but windows shows them as UDMA-5. I am not running RAID, just 2 SATA drives. Are the drives running at the full 150 speed or are they being limited to regular Ultra ATA drives because they are connected to the ICH5 controller? I get a different answer from everyone I ask. Should I move the drives to the Fastrack controller to "insure" I'm getting the right performance or leave them as is? Again, no RAID. Thanks for anyone who can give me the answer. If you download the ICH5R datasheet, for the other I/O devices on the Southbridge, it says: "Note that most transactions targeted to the ICH5 first appear on the external PCI bus before being claimed back by the ICH5. The exceptions are I/O cycles involving USB, IDE, SATA, and AC97. These transactions complete over the hub interface without appearing on the external PCI bus." I interpret this to mean, that storage devices plugged into the SATA or IDE ports, are not restricted by PCI bandwidth concerns. There are still bandwidth issues however - the IDE ports have a max write speed of 88.9MB/sec and max read of 100MB/sec (i.e. ATA100). The write speed is limited by a 22.5ns write strobe chosen for the implementation (=44.4MHz x 16 bits). The SATA drives, the IDE drives, and the PCI bus all share a 266MB/sec hub interface from the Northbridge. Two SATA drives bursting from controller cache can saturate the bus by themselves. On sustained bursts from large files, the head data rate of the disk will be the limiting factor. With Raptors, maybe this would be about 70MB/sec or so on each drive (I didn't verify this number on storagereview.com). As with any PCI bus, all devices on the PCI bus are limited to an aggregate of about 100MB/sec practical bus bandwidth. (You can turn up the burst length on a card and improve this a bit, at the expense of fairness problems with other PCI cards, like PCI sound cards.) Total bandwidth 266MB/sec SATA 2*150MB/sec burst not possible 2*70MB/sec sustained practical with Raptors IDE 89/100MB/sec PCI 100MB/sec PCI+IDE+SATA total 266MB/sec If a non-native bridging implementation is used on the disk's controller card, then again, there can be a limit going from a parallel representation on the disk controller, to the serial format finally sent down the cable. Benchmarking a single drive might identify what burst limit the controller has internally. Drive manufacturers don't like to acknowledge such limits. Moving drives to a PCI bus based controller is not a good answer. Barring some software limitations, the Southbridge based interfaces have the advantage. HTH, Paul |
|
"R. Marshall Chew" wrote in message
... Installed two drives on Windows XP Pro PC (P4C800 Deluxe) using the onboard Intel ICH5 SATA controller (not the Promise controller). Didn't have to do the "F6" routine on install as XP recognized the SATA drives. Here is my question: In device manager, C (WD740 raptor boot drive) and D (Seagate 160) both show as 3rd and 4th master and there are two instances of "eide controllers" (DVD and CDRoms are on the regular ide controllers 1 and 2). In the BIOS the drives show as UDMA-6 (on boot- up), but windows shows them as UDMA-5. I am not running RAID, just 2 SATA drives. Are the drives running at the full 150 speed or are they being limited to regular Ultra ATA drives because they are connected to the ICH5 controller? I get a different answer from everyone I ask. Should I move the drives to the Fastrack controller to "insure" I'm getting the right performance or leave them as is? Again, no RAID. Thanks for anyone who can give me the answer. Is this a P4C800 Deluxe or the P4C800 E-Deluxe? If it is just the Deluxe and not the E-Deluxe then you don't have the ICH5 Sata Controller, this model only has the Promise one. |
Is this a P4C800 Deluxe or the P4C800 E-Deluxe? If it is just the Deluxe and not the E-Deluxe then you don't have the ICH5 Sata Controller, this model only has the Promise one. The ICH5 is a SATA controller,the ICH5R is a SATA raid controller. |
"Courseyauto" wrote in message
... Is this a P4C800 Deluxe or the P4C800 E-Deluxe? If it is just the Deluxe and not the E-Deluxe then you don't have the ICH5 Sata Controller, this model only has the Promise one. The ICH5 is a SATA controller,the ICH5R is a SATA raid controller. Wow isn't my face red..... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HardwareBanter.com