8KNXP ITE suffers BAD performance...

Discussion in 'Gigabyte' started by modem, Jul 24, 2003.

  1. modem

    modem Guest

    Earlier today I decided to do a comparison of the ITE Gigaraid IDE
    chipset vs a standard Promise UltraTX2 IDE PCI adapter. I did this
    after I read a few comments over the past few months that suggest the
    ITE Gigaraid chipset is very subpar.

    All of my tests were ran on a clean fresh Windows 2000 installed
    system on my new GA-8KNXP system with 1GB of Corsair XMS memory. I
    used HD Tach for the benchmarking and without further waiting... here
    is the results:

    (I appologize for no screenshots, I didn't have my network up to copy
    them over)

    ITE GigaRaid IT8212 (Drivers version 1.0.0)
    Drive Access Time Burst Speed CPU Utilization
    M 30GB ¹ 19.0ms 30.9mbps 2.7%
    M 40GB ² 12.2ms 30.9mbps 4.4%
    M 80GB ¹ 13.2ms 30.8mbps 0.9%
    M 80GB ² 11.7ms 31.0mbps 2.1%

    ( M = Maxtor )
    ( ¹ = UDMA 5 )
    ( ² = UDMA 6 )

    Promise UltraTX2 PCI Adapter card (Driver version
    Drive Access Time Burst Speed CPU Utilization
    M 30GB ¹ 19.9ms 86.9mbps 1.9%
    M 40GB ² 12.3ms 116.5mbps 2.2%
    M 80GB ¹ 13.6ms 86.1mbps 7.0%
    M 80GB ² 11.5ms 116.5mbps 4.1%

    As you all can see there is QUITE a huge discrepency regarding the
    performance of the ITE chip vs a standard Promise IDE adapter. I
    can't be sure if this is a driver issue, a chip BIOS issue or what.
    If someone knows where to get later drivers I'll give them a test.

    modem, Jul 24, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. modem

    Tim Guest

    That need to do some fixes pronto. I have never seen a bios init take so
    long (ITE in non RAID config).

    - Tim
    Tim, Jul 25, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. modem

    Tim Guest

    It seems, for some really odd reason that you have to have the ITE
    configured as RAID before the Windows installer will run. Same for other IDE

    Seems picky to me.

    You can't configure a non-raid config on any of these controllers when they
    are set to RAID in bios. IE I thought JBOD was where each drive was an
    ordinary individual drive, instead it seems to be drive spanning (IE a
    variant of RAID 0 - Striping), but alas no, these controllers insist you
    have 2 or more drives before JBOD is permitted.

    JBOD is as dangerous as RAID 0 - twice the probability of a drive failure
    (with 2 discs) and so loss of data.
    Strange, everyone goes for performance, I go for data safety - RAID 1 - if
    any RAID.

    The device scan with ITE is about as slow - if not slower than SCSI. But at
    least with SCSI in the same time it will pick up 15 devices, not four. Way
    way too slow. They need to fix this.

    - Tim
    Tim, Jul 26, 2003
  4. modem

    Bob Davis Guest

    Well, I had everything set in the bios for RAID, had the two drives ready on
    the two ITE controllers, and had the array created. I don't know what else
    I could've done to tell the system, Windows, and the world I was trying to
    install WinXP on the two RAID drives, which were the only two in the
    computer. They were set up as an array prior to the OS installation, and
    ITE was seeing them as such.

    performance, I go for data safety -

    I never worried much about the chances of an array failure in my old system,
    which ran RAID0 (Highpoint on an Abit mobo). Every Saturday I cloned the C:
    drive in Norton Ghost, left the cloned drive in the system (Win98SE), and
    backed up important files (email, WAB, business databases, etc.) every
    evening. If the RAID crapped out I could be up and running in 10 or 15
    minutes without even any major hardware swapping. When my IBM 75GXP died
    about 18 months ago I lost nothing and was back to normal in minutes.

    You can't safely leave a cloned drive with an active partition in a system
    running WinXP and presumably W2K, but Win9x has no problem at all with such
    an arrangement. Now after I do my weekly clone I remove the drive before
    rebooting into WinXP, put the clone on the shelf (with three others that are
    rotated), and perform my daily backups to a dedicated backup drive that is
    permanently installed in the system as D:. It doesn't contain all files
    like before, but just those dynamic files I would have backed up before onto
    the cloned drive. I'm not running RAID now, but if C: dies I would use the
    latest clone, then move the dynamic files from D: back to C:, essentially
    accomplishing the same thing as before, just with a few more steps to the

    I seem to recall the ITE scan to be slow, but so was the Highpoint on my old
    system, and also for the SCSI adapter I still have installed. The SCSI
    (Adaptec AHA-2930) takes at least 15 seconds to scan when it isn't optioned
    to boot from CD, in which case it takes seven seconds longer while it checks
    the CD drive on SCSI-ID 0 every time for a bootable disk. I normally have
    that option disabled for obvious reasons, as I rarely need to boot from a
    Bob Davis, Jul 26, 2003
  5. Dumb question
    Did you remember to load the RAID drivers at the start of installing Windows
    when it asks you if you want to add support for any other controllers
    (something like that).
    Timothy Drouillard, Jul 26, 2003
  6. modem

    nobody Guest

    Exactly! My friend editted the actual file, and changed the path - he
    didn't browse to it, because as you stated, that doesn't work. If I
    can get a copy of the file from him, I'll try to post it.
    nobody, Jul 26, 2003
  7. modem

    nobody Guest

    I heard back from my friend - states he found an easier way:

    After you create the driver disk, make another directory on the floppy
    and name it: ITE_RAID Then copy the 3 driver files from the XP dir to
    the ITE_RAID directory, and to the root directory of the floppy disk.

    Even if you don't need this info anymore, I'm sure lots of other
    people out there would find it handy.

    nobody, Jul 27, 2003
  8. modem

    Bob Davis Guest

    Well, I may not need it now, but I've saved for later use in case GB gets
    their act together and revives ITE RAID. As it is now I wouldn't use it
    even if I could get it to work. Thanks for the input.
    Bob Davis, Jul 27, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.