A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » Overclocking AMD Processors
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Question about transfer speeds between HDs, and DMA mode



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 20th 04, 08:33 PM
ZigZag Master
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question about transfer speeds between HDs, and DMA mode

I have a Maxtor 200GB (6Y200P0) and a Western Digital 250GB WD2500JB in a
AMD 2500 / Abit NF7-S - 1GB RAM. I am running Windows XP Pro.

I was wondering how long it should take to copy large files between the
drives.

I have some TV captures that are about 8-12GB. It just seems like it takes
a long time to copy from drive to drive....about 6-8 minutes. Is this
normal?

Also, do I have to do anything special to turn on DMA mode? I think I was
using Pinnacle Studio, and it popped up a window saying DMA mode was not
enabled on the Maxtor.

Thanks





  #2  
Old July 20th 04, 10:04 PM
Wes Newell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:33:29 -0400, ZigZag Master wrote:

I have a Maxtor 200GB (6Y200P0) and a Western Digital 250GB WD2500JB in a
AMD 2500 / Abit NF7-S - 1GB RAM. I am running Windows XP Pro.

I was wondering how long it should take to copy large files between the
drives.

I have some TV captures that are about 8-12GB. It just seems like it takes
a long time to copy from drive to drive....about 6-8 minutes. Is this
normal?

Also, do I have to do anything special to turn on DMA mode? I think I was
using Pinnacle Studio, and it popped up a window saying DMA mode was not
enabled on the Maxtor.

For best performance, make sure the 2 drives are not on the same channel
(cable). If they are on the same channel, this will be a major
slowdown, as each channel can only perform 1 IO fubction at a time. So
it will have to read to ram, then write back out to the same channel.
Using 2 channels (cables), both will happen at the same time. Then make
sure you have them set to the fastest settings they support. I use hdparm
to check/set mine, but I run linux. Not sure where you set/check drive
modes in win.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  #3  
Old July 20th 04, 10:30 PM
ZigZag Master
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

OK, I also have 1 DVD writer and 1 DVD reader, so if I understand you
correctly, I should put one HD and one DVD on each channel???

thanks



"Wes Newell" wrote in message
newsan.2004.07.20.21.10.40.749665@TAKEOUTverizon .net...
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:33:29 -0400, ZigZag Master wrote:

I have a Maxtor 200GB (6Y200P0) and a Western Digital 250GB WD2500JB in

a
AMD 2500 / Abit NF7-S - 1GB RAM. I am running Windows XP Pro.

I was wondering how long it should take to copy large files between the
drives.

I have some TV captures that are about 8-12GB. It just seems like it

takes
a long time to copy from drive to drive....about 6-8 minutes. Is this
normal?

Also, do I have to do anything special to turn on DMA mode? I think I

was
using Pinnacle Studio, and it popped up a window saying DMA mode was not
enabled on the Maxtor.

For best performance, make sure the 2 drives are not on the same channel
(cable). If they are on the same channel, this will be a major
slowdown, as each channel can only perform 1 IO fubction at a time. So
it will have to read to ram, then write back out to the same channel.
Using 2 channels (cables), both will happen at the same time. Then make
sure you have them set to the fastest settings they support. I use hdparm
to check/set mine, but I run linux. Not sure where you set/check drive
modes in win.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm



  #4  
Old July 21st 04, 12:03 AM
TBC OZoNE
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"ZigZag Master" wrote in message
...
OK, I also have 1 DVD writer and 1 DVD reader, so if I understand you
correctly, I should put one HD and one DVD on each channel???

thanks



"Wes Newell" wrote in message
newsan.2004.07.20.21.10.40.749665@TAKEOUTverizon .net...
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:33:29 -0400, ZigZag Master wrote:

I have a Maxtor 200GB (6Y200P0) and a Western Digital 250GB WD2500JB

in
a
AMD 2500 / Abit NF7-S - 1GB RAM. I am running Windows XP Pro.

I was wondering how long it should take to copy large files between

the
drives.

I have some TV captures that are about 8-12GB. It just seems like it

takes
a long time to copy from drive to drive....about 6-8 minutes. Is

this
normal?

Also, do I have to do anything special to turn on DMA mode? I think I

was
using Pinnacle Studio, and it popped up a window saying DMA mode was

not
enabled on the Maxtor.

For best performance, make sure the 2 drives are not on the same channel
(cable). If they are on the same channel, this will be a major
slowdown, as each channel can only perform 1 IO fubction at a time. So
it will have to read to ram, then write back out to the same channel.
Using 2 channels (cables), both will happen at the same time. Then make
sure you have them set to the fastest settings they support. I use

hdparm
to check/set mine, but I run linux. Not sure where you set/check drive
modes in win.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm


In a Nutshell yea....
But what else you could do to increase speed is add a Raid or IDE card to
you system and have each drive run on its Own interface....
Say hard drives on Motherboard IDE channels 1 and 2 and then DVD drives on
add-on card for IDE 3-4.
I been thinkin about doin this myself....I have a Promise IDE 133 card
sitting here that I may throw my DvDPlayer and CD-RW on and split the hard
drives....but due to Case size so many cables would kill airflow for me.
OZoNE





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  #5  
Old July 21st 04, 12:52 AM
Ron Reaugh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"ZigZag Master" wrote in message
...
OK, I also have 1 DVD writer and 1 DVD reader, so if I understand you
correctly, I should put one HD and one DVD on each channel???


Right.


  #6  
Old July 21st 04, 08:31 AM
Wes Newell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:30:40 -0400, ZigZag Master wrote:

OK, I also have 1 DVD writer and 1 DVD reader, so if I understand you
correctly, I should put one HD and one DVD on each channel???

If you've only got 2 channels and 4 devices, then you want the devices you
copy to/from most on seperate channels. but you also need to consider
from which drive you copy to the DVD wiriter most and keep them seperate
as well if possible. It depsnds on how you use the sytem as to how to best
configure the drives. Someone suggested another controller card, using 1
drive per channel. That would be the best solution if that's posssible.
They're cheap as dirt (I bought a dual channel with raid for about $10),
so cost shouldn't be an issue for most people.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  #7  
Old July 21st 04, 01:27 PM
Folkert Rienstra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"Wes Newell" wrote in message newsan.2004.07.20.21.10.40.749665@TAKEOUTverizon .net
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:33:29 -0400, ZigZag Master wrote:

I have a Maxtor 200GB (6Y200P0) and a Western Digital 250GB WD2500JB in a
AMD 2500 / Abit NF7-S - 1GB RAM. I am running Windows XP Pro.

I was wondering how long it should take to copy large files between the
drives.

I have some TV captures that are about 8-12GB. It just seems like it takes
a long time to copy from drive to drive....about 6-8 minutes. Is this
normal?

Also, do I have to do anything special to turn on DMA mode? I think I was
using Pinnacle Studio, and it popped up a window saying DMA mode was not
enabled on the Maxtor.

For best performance, make sure the 2 drives are not on the same channel
(cable). If they are on the same channel, this will be a major
slowdown,


Nope.

as each channel can only perform 1 IO fubction at a time.


Like this would be any different for SCSI or any other bus.

So it will have to read to ram, then write back out to the same channel.


So what. An IDE channel can support two drives.

Using 2 channels (cables), both will happen at the same time.


Nope.

Then make
sure you have them set to the fastest settings they support. I use hdparm
to check/set mine, but I run linux. Not sure where you set/check drive
modes in win.

  #8  
Old July 21st 04, 01:48 PM
Michael Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Folkert Rienstra wrote:
"Wes Newell" wrote in message
newsan.2004.07.20.21.10.40.749665@TAKEOUTverizon .net
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:33:29 -0400, ZigZag Master wrote:

I have a Maxtor 200GB (6Y200P0) and a Western Digital 250GB
WD2500JB in a AMD 2500 / Abit NF7-S - 1GB RAM. I am running
Windows XP Pro.

I was wondering how long it should take to copy large files between
the drives.

I have some TV captures that are about 8-12GB. It just seems like
it takes a long time to copy from drive to drive....about 6-8
minutes. Is this normal?

Also, do I have to do anything special to turn on DMA mode? I
think I was using Pinnacle Studio, and it popped up a window saying
DMA mode was not enabled on the Maxtor.


For best performance, make sure the 2 drives are not on the same
channel (cable). If they are on the same channel, this will be a
major
slowdown,


Nope.


Wrong. His drives will only be running at half their potential if they're
both on the same channel.

as each channel can only perform 1 IO fubction at a time.


Like this would be any different for SCSI or any other bus.


Actually, it is. An ATA bus (current SATA implementations or parallel) can
only have one active request at a time. A SCSI bus can have requests
outstanding, so there is very little wastage of bus bandwidth (though more
complex electronics are needed).

So it will have to read to ram, then write back out to the same
channel.


So what. An IDE channel can support two drives.


Yes, but not at the same time. Only one request can be active at any point
in time. So your drives will run at exactly half of their potential speed if
you only use one channel. This is the reason why doing any sort of IDE RAID
pretty much requires that you have one device per channel, otherwise you
take a big performance hit.

Using 2 channels (cables), both will happen at the same time.


Nope.


You're wrong, again. You should actually understand the topic before you
answer with such confidence

[...]

--
Michael Brown
www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more
Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open


  #9  
Old July 21st 04, 03:44 PM
Eric Gisin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Michael Brown" wrote in message
...
Folkert Rienstra wrote:

So it will have to read to ram, then write back out to the same
channel.


So what. An IDE channel can support two drives.


Yes, but not at the same time. Only one request can be active at any point
in time. So your drives will run at exactly half of their potential speed if
you only use one channel. This is the reason why doing any sort of IDE RAID
pretty much requires that you have one device per channel, otherwise you
take a big performance hit.

It doesn't matter if you are doing sequential copies. IDE drives implement
read ahead and write behind, so the host is transfering to/from the cache and
both drives read and write at the same time. Similar argument for ROM to
writer on the same channel. The speed of the channel is enough for two
devices.

Using 2 channels (cables), both will happen at the same time.


Nope.


You're wrong, again. You should actually understand the topic before you
answer with such confidence

You are the one who doesn't understand. You can easily do CD duplication with
both drives on one UDMA-33 channel. This was what the prior poster asked.

  #10  
Old July 22nd 04, 08:56 AM
Michael Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Eric Gisin wrote:
"Michael Brown" wrote in message
...
Folkert Rienstra wrote:

So it will have to read to ram, then write back out to the same
channel.

So what. An IDE channel can support two drives.


Yes, but not at the same time. Only one request can be active at any
point in time. So your drives will run at exactly half of their
potential speed if you only use one channel. This is the reason why
doing any sort of IDE RAID pretty much requires that you have one
device per channel, otherwise you take a big performance hit.

It doesn't matter if you are doing sequential copies. IDE drives
implement read ahead and write behind, so the host is transfering
to/from the cache and both drives read and write at the same time.
Similar argument for ROM to writer on the same channel. The speed of
the channel is enough for two devices.


The cache and write buffers have (almost) no effect on the situation we're
talking about he multi-gigabyte file moves between hard disks. The write
buffer on the drive will be 100% full all the time, and the read cache will
never have a chance to get ahead of the interface (as the interface is 2-3
times faster than the off-the-platter speed of the drive). The write request
will be sent to the drive, but the interface will stall until there is a
free block in the (write) cache. Likewise for reading. The request will come
in for a number of sectors. From the start of this request to the time when
the drive has finished sending the data, the interface is in use.

A timeline might help. The following assumptions are made:
1) Zero seek time
2) 50mbytes/sec sustained reading and writing (HDD manufacturer mbytes,
1mbyte = 1000000 bytes)
3) Sufficient data hasa been transferred already to fill up the write buffer
on the destination drive (~12mb or so)
4) The drive can transmit as it's read off the platters (ie: doesn't cache
then send)
5) Requests don't take any time to send.
6) Interface is ATA133

If 1, 3, 4 or 5 don't hold, it makes the analysis somewhat more complex, and
decreases the throughput on the bus. So I'm assuming best-case conditions
here. Times are in ms to 3sf.

One channel:
t = 0.000: 64kb (treating kb = 1024 bytes here) read request to drive 1. Bus
becomes allocated to drive 1.
t = 0.010: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 1 off the platters, and has sent
it.
t = 0.020: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 2 off the platters, and has sent
it.
t = 1.311: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 128 off the platters, and has
sent it. The bus is now free.
t = 1.311: 64kb write request to drive 2. Bus becomes allocated to drive 2.
Read request queued in HDD driver for drive 1.
t = 1.315: Drive 2 finishes receiving sector 1 from the interface. Begins
writing to platters. Begins reading sector 2 from interface.
t = 1.325: Drive 2 finishes writing sector 1 to platters.
t = 2.625: Drive 2 finishes writing sector 128 to the platters. The bus is
now free.
So, it has taken 2.625ms to transfer 64kb, giving drive-to-drive copy speed
of very slightly under 25 mbytes/sec. Actually, it's not usually quite this
bad, since some of the time the firmware is successful in reading ahead in
the right way. I was curious about this about a year ago, and wrote a small
assembler/FreePascal program to do the tests (bootdisk somewhat like
memtest86). In a benchmark between two Seagate 80gb drives (2mb cache) I
measured it to copy about 35 mbytes/sec. Two-channel copying was measured at
~50 mbytes sec (this was all done at the start of the drive IIRC). It's
quite possible that Seagate's firmware is just hopeless at reading ahead,
but since I'm not rich enough to have a whole lot of unused hard disks
floating around, I never got around to testing any others. You can probably
do much the same thing in linux doing a dd from /dev/hda to /dev/hdb or
similar (I always choose the hard way to do things ). I can probably whip
up a quick linux bootdisk (or try to find my original program) if you want
to test it yourself.

Two channels:
t = 0.000: 64kb (treating kb = 1024 bytes here) read request to drive 1 on
bus 1. Bus 1 becomes allocated to drive 1.
t = 0.010: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 1 off the platters, and has sent
it.
t = 0.020: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 2 off the platters, and has sent
it.
t = 1.311: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 128 off the platters, and has
sent it. Bus 1 is now free.
t = 1.311: 64kb write request to drive 2 on second channel. Bus 2 becomes
allocated to drive 2.
t = 1.311: 64kb read request to drive 1 on bus 1. Bus 1 becomes allocated to
drive 1.
t = 1.315: Drive 2 finishes receiving sector 1 from the interface. Begins
writing to platters. Begins reading sector 2 from interface.
t = 1.321: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 129 off the platters, and has
sent it.
t = 1.325: Drive 2 finishes writing sector 1 to platters.
t = 2.621: Drive 1 finishes reading sector 256 off the platters, and has
sent it. Bus 1 is now free.
t = 2.625: Drive 2 finishes writing sector 128 to the platters. Bus 2 is now
free.

So, now it's only taking 1.315ms to transfer 64kb, giving a drive-to-drive
copy speed of just under 50 mbytes/sec.

In SCSI, however, data is separated from request packets (as I understand
it, I haven't looked into it as much as ATA, mainly for financial reasons
). Without going into a whole lot of timing detail, the transfer looks
more like:
Send read to drive 1. Bus is freed immediately after transfer. The drive
begins reading data into an internal buffer.
Drive 1 sends a read acknowledge back to the controller, along with the data
(at full bus speed, from the buffer).
Send read to drive 1. Bus is freed immediately after transfer. The drive
begins reading data into an internal buffer.
Send write to drive 2, along with data. Data is buffered into internal
buffer, and the bus is freed immediately after the transfer of the request.
The drive begins writing data onto the platters.
Drive 1 sends a read acknowledge back to the controller, along with the data
(at full bus speed, from the buffer).
Drive 2 sends a write acknowledge back to the controller.
etc etc

With a bit of sensible programming, the writes are buffered on the CPU side
until the drive reports that the request has been completed. Only then is
the next write request sent out, which is transferred at full bus speed into
the write buffer of the hard disk. In other words, all transfers are done at
full bus speed, with no stalling, and the bus is freed immediately after the
request has been sent (unlike ATA). This is the main advantage of SCSI, and
the reason why you can hang a stupid number of devices off a single channel
without having any performance issues.

Finally, I'm not sure exactly how the various command queuing techniques
that are hopefully going to become part of SATA work. I hope that they
operate along similar lines to what I described for the SCSI, as this would
get rid of one of the disadvantages of ATA.

The whole analysis changes, of course, when you add in significant seek
times. The buffers play a much larger role in saving performance (otherwise
the bus is stalled for ~10ms, OUCH!) here. But this wasn't what the OP was
asking about, so wasn't what I was answering about either.

Using 2 channels (cables), both will happen at the same time.

Nope.


You're wrong, again. You should actually understand the topic before
you answer with such confidence


You are the one who doesn't understand. You can easily do CD
duplication with both drives on one UDMA-33 channel. This was what
the prior poster asked.


Actually, the prior poster was asking about copying multi-gigabyte files
between hard disks. CD writers top out at about 9 mbytes/sec, so even mode 4
PIO is nearly fast enough for CD duplication.

--
Michael Brown
www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more
Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.