corsair performance pro 256gb raid 0 performance

Hi guys, i am newbie to this stuff and i have just bought two corsair 256gb ssds, i have secure erased them and put them in raid 0 mode with 128k stripe.After that, i installed win 7 64 bit on them.Now i compare my ssd bench results with other corsair perfromance pro ssds and i find my ssd's results unexpectedly low.Therefore, i decided to consult you guys here. Is really something wrong with these results below and if so is there any way to improve my ssds performance? I suspect there is something wrong because i click on "my computer" on desktop and it takes a while to access it. my computer window does not appear as soon as i click, takes at least 4 seconds.any help will be appreciated.

This is my atto results:

http://b1204.hizliresim.com/w/p/4pr7h.png

as ssd:

http://b1204.hizliresim.com/w/p/4pqw5.png

as ssd file copy

http://b1204.hizliresim.com/w/p/4pqxf.png

crystal diskmark

http://b1204.hizliresim.com/w/p/4pqy7.png

anvil storage

http://b1204.hizliresim.com/w/p/4pqyz.png

I would hardly call your results bad, what are you comparing them to? Do you have Write-back cache enabled in the RST program in Windows?

The X79 boards are using a different RAID driver than all other earlier boards, the RSTe (enterprise) driver, rather than the usual IRST driver. Some X79 board users have reported issues with that driver. Are you comparing your results with other X79 results, or with Intel 6-series chipset results, for example?

The pause between clicking and the display of My Computer is strange, I've never seen that before. Is that the only pause you experience? Do programs open quickly? How about your PCs boot time (after POST?)

I would hardly call your results bad, what are you comparing them to? Do you have Write-back cache enabled in the RST program in Windows?

 

The X79 boards are using a different RAID driver than all other earlier boards, the RSTe (enterprise) driver, rather than the usual IRST driver. Some X79 board users have reported issues with that driver. Are you comparing your results with other X79 results, or with Intel 6-series chipset results, for example?

 

The pause between clicking and the display of My Computer is strange, I've never seen that before. Is that the only pause you experience? Do programs open quickly? How about your PCs boot time (after POST?)

I figured out that the pause issue has something to do with Kaspersky antivirus.It has nothing to do with ssds so we can rule that out.After post, boot seems to be ok,it boots just in a ten or eleven seconds and the programs open quickly.

Compared my results to performance pro raid 0 review from pureoverclock below, my results seemed a bit slow to me.Yet, as you stated, they used a z68 mobo in their review.Does using a different irst driver make a such a difference? I use the stock firmware of corsair performance pro(i suppose version 1.0) and used the irst driver came with mobo cd(which may be rste version).

http://www.pureoverclock.com/article1457.html

Now that we have more information about your situation (background anti-virus program running) and what you are comparing your result to, things are making more sense.

If your anti-virus program caused pauses, and you ran your benchmark tests with it active, it certainly will affect the test results. The test program is using your SSDs, and so is the anti-virus program, which interrupts it.

The test results in that review were different than yours for another reason, the SSDs being tested in a RAID 0 volume were empty, an OS was not installed on them. You can see in the AS SSD screen shot in that review that the test drive is the F: drive, not the C: drive. Your SSDs are your OS drive, and are constantly serving Windows, and all the services and programs it is running. Start Windows Task Manager, and check how many processes are running in the background, I have 53 running now, and all I have started myself is my Internet browser and a hardware monitoring program. Windows is a multi-tasking OS, and it does not wait and cannot wait for one program to complete before it does something for another running program. So it will perform a disk I/O on the same disk volume that is being tested, causing the test program to wait. The test program reading and writing on a non-OS drive does not have all those interruptions. All of this makes a big difference in the test results.

Actually the details of the system used in that review are unknown, but testing empty drives is the standard method used, since it produces the best results. Other factors that affect test results are CPU over clock (increases scores), and power saving options enabled on the CPU (decreases scores.)

There are many variables involved in testing like this, and so many details that make a difference, many you may not be aware of. You said yourself you did not have much experience in these things. You also never answered my question about having Write-back cache enabled?

Now that we have more information about your situation (background anti-virus program running) and what you are comparing your result to, things are making more sense.

 

If your anti-virus program caused pauses, and you ran your benchmark tests with it active, it certainly will affect the test results. The test program is using your SSDs, and so is the anti-virus program, which interrupts it.

 

The test results in that review were different than yours for another reason, the SSDs being tested in a RAID 0 volume were empty, an OS was not installed on them. You can see in the AS SSD screen shot in that review that the test drive is the F: drive, not the C: drive. Your SSDs are your OS drive, and are constantly serving Windows, and all the services and programs it is running. Start Windows Task Manager, and check how many processes are running in the background, I have 53 running now, and all I have started myself is my Internet browser and a hardware monitoring program. Windows is a multi-tasking OS, and it does not wait and cannot wait for one program to complete before it does something for another running program. So it will perform a disk I/O on the same disk volume that is being tested, causing the test program to wait. The test program reading and writing on a non-OS drive does not have all those interruptions. All of this makes a big difference in the test results.

 

Actually the details of the system used in that review are unknown, but testing empty drives is the standard method used, since it produces the best results. Other factors that affect test results are CPU over clock (increases scores), and power saving options enabled on the CPU (decreases scores.)

 

There are many variables involved in testing like this, and so many details that make a difference, many you may not be aware of. You said yourself you did not have much experience in these things. You also never answered my question about having Write-back cache enabled?

sorry i forgot to add that write back cache is enabled.you have explained all these wery well.Now i feel very well informed.I assume all factors you mentioned considered, there is nothing to worry about bench results.Thanks for your effort to explain all these to me.much appreciated.