Disk Controller Performance

With so many storage controllers on the nForce4 SLI boards, we needed a means of comparing performance of the wide variety of controllers. The logical choice was Anand's storage benchmark first described in Q2 2004 Desktop Hard Drive Comparison: WD Raptor vs the World. To refresh your memory, the iPeak test was designed to measure "pure" hard disk performance, and in this case, we kept the hard drive as consistent as possible while varying the hard drive controller. The idea is to measure the performance of a hard drive controller with a consistent hard drive. We played back Anand's raw files that recorded I/O operations when running a real world benchmark - the entire Winstone 2004 suite. Intel's IPEAK utility was then used to play back the trace of all the IO operations that took place during a single run of Business Winstone 2004 and MCC Winstone 2004. To try to isolate performance difference to the controllers that we were testing, we used Seagate 7200.7 model SATA and IDE hard drives for all tests.

iPeak gives a mean service time in milliseconds; in other words, the average time that each drive took to fulfill each IO operation. In order to make the data more understandable, we report the scores as an average number of IO operations per second so that higher scores translate into better performance. This number is meaningless as far as hard disk performance is concerned as it is just the number of IO operations completed in a second. However, the scores are useful for comparing "pure" performance of the storage controllers in this case.

iPeak Business Winstone Hard Disk I/O

iPeak MM Content Creation Hard Disk I/O

It is interesting that the performance patterns hold across both Multimedia Content IO and Business IO, with the on-board NVIDIA SATA 2 providing fastest IO, followed closely by the SiS 180 and Silicon Image 3132 SATA 2 controllers. Please keep in mind that we are testing with SATA 1 drives. In the future, we plan to test with 3Gb/sec SATA 2 drives, which theoretically should have even higher throughput.

The Silicon Image 3114 controller is only a bit slower in MM Content IO, but it quite a bit slower in Business IO. The 3114 does uniquely feature RAID 3 capabilities.

IDE provided the slowest IO performance in this roundup, demonstrating that SATA controllers are finally starting to show a performance edge - at least in IO operations.

We also plan to include IDE RAID and SATA RAID benchmarks in future motherboard tests. Comparing RAID performance on various controllers will definitely be a part of future storage benchmarking and possibly motherboard tests as well as new on-board RAID controllers that are introduced.

Overclocking Firewire and USB Performance
Comments Locked

75 Comments

View All Comments

  • vijay333 - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    oh...final system will have 4-5 HDs, standard DVD reader/writer along with (most likely) a 6800Ultra or a X800XL...
  • Xenoterranos - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Anandtech did toy with a listening test a while back (I really don't remember much about it, other than the fact that they should have used Klipsch proMedia Ultra 5.1 speakers...)
  • vijay333 - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Maybe I missed this info in the article somehow, but could you provide the minimum/recommended PSU wattages for the motherboards? esp the DFI and the Epox. I have a Antec 400W Smartpower PSU right now, but read a few posts on newegg that this might not be enough? Hope I don't need to upgrade this too along with the mobo, cpu and gpu...
  • vijay333 - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

  • knitecrow - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    I have a comment about audio -- a topic that most sites ignore.

    Shouldn't there be a blind listening test?


    i mean cpu utilization is fairly useless. If i am listening to mp3s i care more about the quality than cpu utilization.
  • flatblastard - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    I stopped reading on page 4 upon discovering the round-up. No explanation needed...
  • Wesley Fink - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    g33k -
    The DFI was more a control to demonstrate SLI and Ultra performance were the same other than SLI video. Drivers have updated and we retested everything on the DFI as a sanity check. We ran benchmarks and not a full review, but it was hard to ignore the excellent performance.

    There is also a comment in our Final Words that the MSI Ultra board should also be considered a winner, since the SLI version was a Gold Editors Choice in the SLI roundup, and the Ultra should perform the same.
  • g33k - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

    Along the same logic though, I'm curious as to why you chose to review the DFI Ultra-D when you reviewed the SLI version of this board earlier as well?.
  • g33k - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

    Jeez, read Wesley's comments, he just answered why he did not review, the MSI board. It was already reviewed in the SLI roundup.

  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, July 5, 2005 - link

    "As you can see, none of the onboard audio solutions were quite as low in CPU utilization as the Creative SoundBlaster Live! Chip, which is used on the MSI K8N Neo4 SLI Platinum tested in the nForce4 SLI roundup."

    Since this is still nF4 we included components tested on all nForce4 boards. The Ultra version of the MSI, BTW, uses the Realtek ALC850 chipset and not the Sound Blaster Live!. The SB Live! is only used on the MSI SLI.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now