locked
Very impressed with PP1 speeds! RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • So I decided to start from a blank slate.  I set up a Intel 965 based motherboard with 2GB DDR2 800 and a Celeron e1200 dual core 1.6ghz.  I have 1 320GB SATA Seagate for my main boot drive and 3 500GB Western Digital green power models for the storage pool.  I loaded WHS first, did all the updates and then loaded PP1 as per the instructions.

    The first thing I had to do was figure out how to get ACHI enabled and it was not easy.  I had to install the entire OS and then reboot and do a repair install after loading the proper Intel ICH9R ACHI drivers (Matrix Storage Manager) with a floppy drive.  I  Regardless, it worked and I had ACHI working and enabled.  Whats interesting is that the Intel Matrix Storage Manager version 8.x and above allow write-back caching to be enabled with ACHI.  Very nice, and I enabled advanced performance in the device manager under my drive options (enables write-back caching I believe).

    I also found that right now the Marvel Yukon Gigabit 88E8053 PCI-E based is a very cheap and fast card with fantastic drivers which support jumbo frames has the best performance for my uses.  I use one in my server along with the latest drivers.

    I ran Windows 2003 server before this and am used to getting >50MB/s (yes MB not Mb)  performance with sequential transfers between Vista SP1 with the same gig adapter.  Well I wasn't expecting WHS to match that performance.  Pre-PP1 WHS was not very fast and at the most I saw about 20MB/s transfer rates with tons of grinding for no apparent reason.  In fact I ditched WHS months ago because it was too slow.

    Now, it matches 2003 server in performance and transfers.  I have transfered almost 2TB onto my storage pool and its running >50MB/s almost all the time.  I can even achieve 70MB/s for some files transfered from a WD Raptor 150GB drive.  FANTASTIC!!!!

    I can't say how much of an improvement this is.  Hopefully there wont be any show stopping bugs but so far I abolutley love WHS PP1 performance.
    Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:56 PM

All replies

  • Thanks for the great feedback, glad you are happy. Smile

     

    Tuesday, June 10, 2008 11:10 PM
  • I ran a similar test last night using a folder containing AVI files (about 6GB).  I transferred this folder to a pre powerpack1 homebuilt (but fast) machine and also to a HP Mediasmart EX470 with 1-500GB and 1-750GB drive.

     

    Upload and download speeds the the pre beta home bulit machine were much as they have alway been; about 18MBps on average up and down.  The noticable part of the up and download was that transfer speeds varied wildly from zero to 28MBps.

     

    Upload and download speeds were different for the EX470 with PP1 Beta.  Upload was fast and consistent at about 45MBps.  Download speeds were lower, but consistent at an average of about 17MBps.

     

    Overall, a marked improvement.  I'm sure that I will enjoy the final release of PP1 on my  homebuilt machine, as it is a much more capable machine overall.

     

    Tuesday, June 10, 2008 11:30 PM
  •  tDogEast wrote:

    I ran a similar test last night using a folder containing AVI files (about 6GB).  I transferred this folder to a pre powerpack1 homebuilt (but fast) machine and also to a HP Mediasmart EX470 with 1-500GB and 1-750GB drive.

     

    Upload and download speeds the the pre beta home bulit machine were much as they have alway been; about 18MBps on average up and down.  The noticable part of the up and download was that transfer speeds varied wildly from zero to 28MBps.

     

    Upload and download speeds were different for the EX470 with PP1 Beta.  Upload was fast and consistent at about 45MBps.  Download speeds were lower, but consistent at an average of about 17MBps.

     

    Overall, a marked improvement.  I'm sure that I will enjoy the final release of PP1 on my  homebuilt machine, as it is a much more capable machine overall.

     



    Im guessing that jumbo frames and/or better gigabit drivers would make that faster.  Keep in mind my dual core chip gets hit HARD with anything above 40MB/s.  In other words, you need dual core or a fast single core for high speeds.  Alternately you could use a NIC with better offload processing but for me a dual core celeron was cheaper than all that.
    Wednesday, June 11, 2008 12:30 AM
  • I should say that write-back caching is necessary for high write speeds.  I suppose it is a trade off vs reliability but I run a UPS and so I feel safe that nothing will be corrupted.  Plus I don't tend to write tons of things to my server.  Once in a while a big chunk of data gets transfered but after that it sits mostly serving the odd mp3 and video file.
    Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:54 AM
  • I too, noticed a big increase in transfer speeds of larger files (over 1gb).  Previously, the throughput varied widely.  Now I get consistant speeds of 300-400 mbps.  I tested copying some files that were over 8gb and the throughput was maintained throughout the complete transfer.  Sweet.
    Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:00 PM