6 Replies Latest reply on Dec 22, 2010 10:18 AM by ECBowen

    ARECA ARC-1880-i vs. Intel RS2BL040

    sldwaa Level 1

      I was originally planning on using RAID 10 from my MOBO, but am having second thoughts.  I will run the the raid with four Samsung Spinpoint F3R Raid Class 1TB SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Enterprise Hard Drive HE103SJ (4 TB total), and my OS will be separate on a Western Digital VelociRaptor WD6000HLHX 600GB 10000 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive.  In my readings, I believe it is generally accepted that Raid 3 is the best for video editing, but Raid 5 has basically closed the gap to make it more attractive than it has been in the past (please advise if I am off base with this comment).  That being said, in review of Raid controllers, the two I am considering are:

       

      1.) Areca ARC-1880-i ~$552

      2.) Intel RS2BL040 ~$353

       

      Both appear to have similar characteristics (the Intel does not have Raid 3 capabilities but believe I will run Raid 5 unless someone thinks this will decrease performance vs. 3), and I would buy the SATA III (6 GB) for future considerations, as I only now have SATA II (3 GB) for my Raid drives.

       

      That being said, is it worth the additional $200 for the Areca vs. Intel?  I see a lot of favorable posts for Areca, not not Intel.  Both seem to have an I/O processor at 800MHz with on board 512 MB Cache Memory (not expandable).

       

      Any guidance will be appreciated.

        • 1. Re: ARECA ARC-1880-i vs. Intel RS2BL040
          Harm Millaard Level 7

          With the 4 or 8 port models, the difference between Intel and Areca are minimal if you decide for a raid5. If you go for the 12+ port model, the difference in cache memory becomes a major advantage for Areca. Given your options, Intel seems like the best BFTB (Bang-for-the-buck).

          1 person found this helpful
          • 2. Re: ARECA ARC-1880-i vs. Intel RS2BL040
            Jim_Simon Level 9
            Raid 5 has basically closed the gap to make it more attractive than it has been in the past

             

            For sequential reads/writes (which is what video is all about), I'm not sure that will ever be the case.  Have you seen recent benchmarks comparing RAID 3 and RAID 5 on the same card?

            • 3. Re: ARECA ARC-1880-i vs. Intel RS2BL040
              sldwaa Level 1

              No, I have not seen recent benchmarks comparing RAID 3 and RAID 5 on the same card.  I looked at many posts, and thought both would be relatively equal.  I will research some more, if anyone has data, please share.

               

              Harm, I chose to not go with the Areca 1880ix-12 (which I understand can have memory expanded) due to basically the increased cost ~$859.  I am using these "savings" for an upgraded monitor (Dell U2711).  I am trying to keep my new build to approximately $3K - I am at my limit with the cheaper raid controller.  I cannot personally justify more as I dabble in video editing and am not a professional.  I could go higher (my wife does not care), but am trying for once to be practical.  I am still on the fence slightly for the raid 10, but believe you even mention in your posts that for 4+ drives, go with the Raid 3 or 5, and that 10 is too expensive for the $ / TB.  As such, I am heavily leaning toward the Raid 5.

              • 4. Re: ARECA ARC-1880-i vs. Intel RS2BL040
                ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                I would like to see these benchmarks as well. The 8 drive raid 5 and 6 numbers I tested several times are well inline with raid 3.

                 

                Eric

                ADK

                • 5. Re: ARECA ARC-1880-i vs. Intel RS2BL040
                  Jim_Simon Level 9

                  What kind of sustained reads/writes were you seeing Eric?


                  • 6. Re: ARECA ARC-1880-i vs. Intel RS2BL040
                    ECBowen Most Valuable Participant

                    Intel SAS RS2PI080 8 Port controller with 512 DDR2 Ram

                    8x

                    WD VelociRaptor 600 GB, SATA 6 Gb/s, 32 MB Cache, 10,000 RPM

                     

                    8x Drive Raid 5 - 745MB/s read 735MB/s Write

                     

                     

                    WD 1TB SATA 6 Gb/s, 64 MB Cache, 7200 RPM

                     

                     

                    8 Drive Raid 5 - 703.8MB/s read 670MB/s Write

                     

                     

                     

                    These benchmarks were run back when the Intel card first released. There have been several firmware and driver updates optmizing the 6GB/s performance. These have been consistant plus or minus 20MB/s for several months.

                     

                    The raid 6 volume was reading 650MB/s and writing at 605MB/s to 635MB/s

                     

                    Eric

                    ADK