Whis is better: 8GB RAM with 2TB RAID 0 Scratch or 16GB RAM with 32GB SSD?

Having read much on performance, I am presented with deciding on which motherboard to purchase. Given the the CPU is a constant (3.2GHz) and I am using Windows Vista Business 64bit, I am not sure which motherboard would support the most needed functionality that would be the best choice for Photoshop, especially with plugins and producing larger 16 bit Tiff files for HDI. One board maxes at 8GB RAM but provides RAID configurations-in which I would dedicate two 1TB HD running at Striped (0). The other configuration maxes at 16GB, but provides no abilty for RAID. In this situation, I would dedicate a 32GB Solid State Drive or 1TB HD for the Scratch Disk. Any ideas, or am I being too technical?
Thanks, Jarold

Thanks for the reply. I tend to believe that increasing more RAM would
be the first step in realizing noticeable performance improvements. Therefore I will ensure that my motherboard provides at least 16GB of RAM for future expansion.
I will then attempt to overclock the CPU. This is all new stuff for me, but something that I am willing to attempt. My computer is only 7 months old, so I find it a little difficult having to replace the motherboard-which will require a new CPU. This configuration should be good for another 6 months (possibly).
In addition, I will dedicate a drive for the Scratch disk. Micro Center has a 32GB Solid State Drive for about $75 after rebate. This particular drive's benchmarks test fairly high.
Thanks again...
Jarold

Similar Messages

Issues with sleep/wake feature after 16GB RAM upgrade in my MacBook Pro. Any thoughts?

Just installed a 16GB RAM upgrade in my MacBook Pro and now it doesn't wake up on it's own when I open the lid. I have to press the power button. It works fine with a smaller RAM upgrade.
I've tried putting in just one of the 8GB modules and the sleep/wake feature works as normal so there isn't a problem with the RAM modules that I've bought (Crucial.com). I've also put in a combination of Apple's original RAM and the new ones to make 10GB (8GB + 2GB), and the sleep/wake feature works on that too. Put both 8GB modules back in and the MacBook doesn't wake up when I open the lid, I have to press the power button to wake it up. The MacBook itself works fine, super fast and the memory is recognised on 'About This Mac', the sleep/wake issue is the only problem I'm having with the 16GB RAM.
Any thoughts on this? Has anybody else had this sleep/wake issue like this when upgrading RAM?

I upgraded my early 2011 MBP to 16 gigs with Crucial. My machine would not sleep properly, because when I tried to wake it, it would wake from its hibernate image file. This is the issue I've seen here in this list.
I tried all the suggestions I saw on these groups. Nothing helped. I contacted Crucial, who suggested that if their RAM was defective, they'd replace it per their warranty process. I needed some proof it was their RAM causing the problem.
I put the original 8 gigs RAM back in the machine (2 4 gig sticks), and it behaved normally. I then put one stick of Crucial RAM in, all by itself. The machine behaved normally. I put the other stick of Crucial RAM back in, and took the first one out. The machine would not properly sleep and wake from sleep. This proved that one stick was causing the problem, and the other was not.
Defective RAM!
I then requested and received an RMA from Crucial to send the defective RAM back. They paid shipping. I got new sticks of RAM about a week later. These new sticks of RAM work properly. No sleep issues.
I'm surprised and disappointed to say that this is not the first time I've received defective RAM from Crucial. I've purchased from them for years, and had GREAT service and received high quality products. The past couple years my experience has been different.
I'm still pretty steamed about this, as I spent a great deal of time trying to diagnose the problem and fix it. I don't really have that kind of time to waste. My expectation was that their RAM was high quality, and unlikely to be at fault.
Perhaps this is just a bad batch of RAM. I get that. I can forgive them once. But this has happened twice in the past three years. I'll look elsewhere for my next memory purchase.
Keep in mind that their customer ratings are generally very high. My experience is probably isolated.

Raid/Scratch Querries When Using WIth Photoshop

I am about to purchase a Mac Pro 3GHZ and am looking into options with raiding the hard drives. I use my mac for high end photoshop retouching and want to get the best possible performance from the hard drives when saving and openning large files.
I am going to keep the system hard drive seperate, but purchase 2 additional Caviar SE 250 GB hard drives and set up a striped array (Raid 0) for my large working files. However, I am aware that to create an effective scratch disk it is best to partition the hard drive so as not to be detrimental to the main HD and cause fragmentation.
Because I am raiding the 2 Caviar hard drives will it be a mistake to use it as a scratch as well? Obviously the scratch speed would improve but would it affect the performance of the read/write speed of the hard drive for working files? Is it even possible to partition a raid drive and is it advisable? I am not looking to purchase a seperate HD for the scratch as I feel this would be a bit of a waste of money.
Mac Pro 3 GHZ Mac OS X (10.4.8)

The way I would actually configure a Photoshop workstation is to have…
1) Western Digital Raptor 10K 150GB RAID 0 pair for Mac OS X and scratch
2) Maxtor MaXLine Pro 500GB RAID 0 pair for data and secondary scratch
Now, I have to admit this would not be the cheapest setup although it would kick you know what.

Can I buy a Macbook pro retina 13" with 16gb RAM and i7 processor in an physical Apple Store in Spain?

I´m looking a Macbook pro 13 inch, but I would buy it with an i7 processor and 16Gb ram. Can I buy it in a spanish physical Apple Store or only in the Apple Store online?
Thanks

At least in Spain, some Apple Retail Stores have got specific build-to-order MacBooks Pro available, but they are just because they are sold better than any other build-to-order MacBook Pro.
However, as Kappy said, it's quite difficult you can get one with the configuration you want. Have a look at the list of Apple Retail Stores in Spain, choose one and call them to see if there's one available > http://www.apple.com/es/retail/storelist The best way to buy a build-to-order Mac is through Apple Online Store

Early 2013 Macbook Pro Retina 2.7 i7 512GB SSD and 16gb Ram with Serious Cuda Problems! Trying to teach Apple their Macbook Pro Retina isn't a Pro Jan. 11. 2015.

Apple replaced the logic board, wiped the computer, did a fresh instal of the OS, and also a fresh instal of all the programs during the beginning of 2015. The GeekBench scores are the highest of any of the similar computers (at least on the day of my testing). But here's what's happening. The Macbook Pro Retina has a GeForce GT 650m with Cuda Technology and it can't handle editing in Premiere Pro with Cuda Acceleration turned on. Open CL, a second form of graphic acceleration on the Macbook Pro, appears to be functioning properly.
At the Apple Store on 1-10-2015, I was told that since the logic board and the graphic cards have been replaced that there is nothing they can do and they recommend contacting Corporate. This comes after they told me to buy a new logic board and that that would solve the problem. This comes after Apple did not listen, for over a month, about the possibility that they didn't properly build a professional notebook computer.
The computer displays a black program monitor screen, at random times, when the user edits footage with Cuda Acceleration enabled. It used to lead to an entire system crash and/or a Premiere Pro crash before the operating system was completely re-installed. My solution, since I bought the computer, was to edit in Open CL... However, I've come to learn that there is a major difference in performance between Open CL and Cuda Acceleration.
For the Macbook Pro Retina, Adobe Media Encoder render times are about 20% faster with Cuda Acceleration than Open CL. The 2013 Macbook Pro Retina appears to be able to handle Cuda Acceleration in Media Encoder, but I have had a number of issues leading to program crashes on every project before the new logic board and operating system were installed. For over a year and a half, I actually never used Cuda Acceleration. Having sent every crash report and user data to Apple over that time, I truly expected an update of some sorts and it never came.
FYI: The latest Macbook Pro Retina uses the GeForce GT 750m... This is essentially the same graphic card that performs about 10 - 20% faster due to a new "boost mode." More importantly, it actually has the exact same number of Cuda cores. Having the same number of Cuda Cores means that the Cuda Acceleration is essentially the same when exporting or viewing video. To prove a point to Apple that their 2013 Macbook Pro Retina isn't functioning properly, I bought the latest computer with the 2.5 i7, 16gb Ram, 512gb SSD and I can honestly say that the 2014 model works perfectly fine with Cuda Acceleration turned on while editing in Premiere. I can also say that a proper render test proved the 2013 and 2014 model to be the exact same.
I'm new to this whole pay $2700 for a computer that your manufacturer didn't / can't test properly, so I will be contacting Apple and speaking with Senior Advisors, their Customer Support division, and will soon speak with their Corporate branch. I'm confident that the Early 2013 Macbook Pro Retina with a 2.7 i7 16gb Ram and a 512 SSD is nearly the same at rendering video and editing video, provided the Cuda Acceleration works, as their latest 2014 Macbook Pro Retina with the 2.5 i7 processor 16gb Ram, and a 512 SSD. It's truly a great computer and a great build, minus their current inability to properly test / diagnose their computer.
Knowing that the latest graphic card in the Macbook Pro lineup is essentially the same model, I feel that Apple is not directly looking into the viability and life span of their current Macbook Pro Retina product line. They can't test for performance issues relating to their graphic cards, so why consider buying from them when the end user is actually in a position to experience up to a 20% decrease in certain professional programs.
For future reference, I'd strongly urge other individuals to avoid purchasing Apple products if they offer Cuda Technology. In my opinion, Apple is an Open CL organization, at best, who is not responsibly manufacturing / producing computers that fit their organization's strengths. For a fact, they can't test their Cuda Technology and won't even attempt to address Cuda Acceleration errors for Apple owners (01-11-2015). I say this having walked out of the Apple Store on 1-10-2015 with virtually no support other than to contact Corporate.

Looks like a RAM issue.
Memory Module: BANK 0/DIMM0, 8 GB, DDR3, 1600 MHz, 0x02FE, 0x000000000000000000000000000000000000
Memory Module: BANK 1/DIMM0, 8 GB, DDR3, 1600 MHz, 0x02FE, 0x000000000000000000000000000000000000

Photoshop CS6 keeps crashing. I am using a brand new IMAC, I have 16GB RAM recently updated as it was running slow with 8GB and lots of hardrive space. When it crashes, i lose all my presents and it changes my preferences, it also fails to save or produce

Photoshop CS6 keeps crashing. I am using a brand new IMAC, I have 16GB RAM recently updated as it was running slow with 8GB and lots of hardrive space. When it crashes, i lose all my presents and it changes my preferences, it also fails to save or produce a recovered file despite settings asking it to do so every 5 mins now. When i try to report the problem, it says it has found an issue and gives me a link to a solution....but wont let me click on the link.... PLEASE HELP! It's killing my productivity.

If the crash started right after you added RAM, it could be a bad Ram dimm. You can try this - change the amount of RAM in Photoshop to 4G, this should stop Photoshop from using the higher ram. If it doesn't crash, it's probably the ram. Or run a diagnostic app. You don't say when it crashes, what you're doing when it crashes - it there a pattern? Did it ever work on this computer? Did it work on your previous computer? Without a lot of data, it could be related to the new computer... What OS version? Did you recently update it? Have you updated Photoshop to the most recent update?
Do you have any plug-ins loaded? Try restarting Photoshop, and immediately press & hold the shfit key to turn off plug-ins.

13'' dual-core with 16gb ram vs 15'' quad-core 8gb ram -- ram vs cores?

Hello. I am at a point between choosing a 13'' dual-core i5 with 16gb ram vs the 15'' quad-core with 8gb ram - both retinas.
I will be using photoshop and illustrator while uploading/downloading large files constantly. After much headscratching I almost decided on the 13'' i5 because from my experience, RAM limitations is where I usually run into problems, and don't see the extra price of i7 worth it when it is still a dual-core. For the same price I can get a 15'' quad, but will be stuck with 8gb ram.
I don't care about the screen size, I have good eyes and the weigth trade-off makes this a non-issue.
I'm thinking about down the road, as either of these I'm sure will be fine solutions. I'm just wondering where does the edge really come in this case? Ram or processor / cores?
Thanks.

Thanks for your reply tjk, of course with 16gb on the 15'' for $200 more I'd have easier time, but in this case I am comparing a refurbished - the lowest 15'' 16gb I could find would cost $500 more, I just can't do it.
I should make clear that this particular comparison between 13''w/16 and 15''w/8, they are the same price (the 13 being new) - which is why I'm stuck.
To rephrase - for the same price - which will I regret less in 4 years?
As a side note, I can't believe I'm even thinking about paying this much money for something that is not upgradeable, but that's another discussion entirely.

Xcode With MacBook Air 11 and 4 ram will work well ?

Hello Guys ,
I thought to buy MacBook Air 11 and 4gb ram , So i just wanted to ask , he will work good for Development ? Without problems ?

dominic23 wrote:
MacBook Air 13-inch with 8GB RAM will be a better choice.
That statement means nothing without some argumentation. How much does Xcode need RAM? How big codebase works well with 4GB? Have you actually EVER ran out of memory with 4GB usign Xcode?
8GB is better, of course. But if everything can be done with 4GB then it is better to save the money.
I have used MBA 2011/2GB and it worked flawlessly in normal desktop usage (Safari, Terminal, Email etc...). Didn't try with Xcode, though.

3.6 GHz Intel Core i5, 8GB 1333MHz DDR3, 2TB FREEZES UP FROM DAY 1

I have a new imac 3.6 GHz Intel Core i5, 8GB 1333MHz DDR3, 2TB
Its been freezing since the day I've bought it. $2300 dollars down the drain.
I'm trying to edit with FCP but I never get very far. I called Apple support twice. Did the usual Pram, and pull out the plug and hold the button in for 5 seconds, when through the disk repair options, installed the OS. I'm afraid to call again, because i know their going to tell me to erase the disk. I also know thats not the problem, and its going to take a long time to reload everything. I have a MacBook i7, and a PowerMac which I also edit on, and there both solid. I'm an editor by trade.
So I just made a new account, attached a HD with footage on it, (I'm editing the same project on my Macbook, works great). Opened the project started to edit, 5 minutes in. Freeze... and the loud noise.
Been reading other posts... looks like this problem been going on for years.
Has anyone ever fixed this problem?????
Soon I will be boxing up the iMac and sending it back.
I've been editing on Mac's for 20 years.
I've never seen a Mac that really just does not work... this is it.
Its called the iMac. (also my iphone 3s died after a year)
Maybe Apple is getting too big.
Update: Packing it up and taking it back. I believe the Apple RAM is the problem. Lets see if the "Geniuses" can figure it out. I'm not holding my breath. When I brought my dead iphone 3S to the "Geniuses". They ran the same tests i did, had to wait around for a few hours to be told what i already knew. It was a dead. Listen, I Iove Apple, its so depressing, but I believe Apple knows theres a problem with the RAM on these computers. Too many people are having problems. Unlike Toyota, who pays for their faults.... Apple just gets away with it.

Update Just got my iMac back for the second time.
Again Apple has said there's nothing wrong with the computer.
Apple erased the hard drive.
I just tried to upload Time Machine... it froze.
Tried it again, it worked, got everything back.
Then wanted to update software.
Downloaded updated software, then when it rebooted and started to install, it froze.
Did it again.. it froze.
Now just bringing in the updated OS, it worked, rebooted.
Went to Safari... it froze.
Why doesn't the computer freeze when Apple has it?
Is Apple lying?

Hi, I am going to buy a new iMac desktop. I am going for the 3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel i7, 16 GB RAM and 2TB ATA Drive. I want to know whether I should go for the dual drives option i.e including the 256 GB SSD. I do a lot of 'heavy' media work. Brian

Hi, I am going to buy a new iMac desktop. I am going for the 3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel i7, 16 GB RAM and 2TB ATA Drive. I want to know whether I should go for the dual drives option i.e including the 256 GB SSD. I do a lot of 'heavy' media work.

by looking at the specs the laptop is better but if your not a gamer or graphics designer then you most likly wont notice a difference in the performance at all so with that said a few downsides
the processor is i5 the i7 processor is the better processor the graphics card has half the dedicated memory that the laptop has and the hdd compared to the solid state is not much of a difference unless you wanna move your computer all the time you wont need a solid state drive
but like i said before if your not a gamer or graphics designer on your computer you will not notice the difference most likely

Ok, so i bought a imac 27 about 4 months ago, and now they release a new one! ****... So my question is, should I sell this one (which by the way is the i5 2.8 with 1 gb 5750 and 4gb ram) and buy the new imac 27 i5,or keep the one i have and buy more ram

ok, so i bought a imac 27 about 4 months ago, and now they release a new one! ****... So my question is, should I sell this one (which by the way is the i5 2.8 with 1 gb 5750 and 4gb ram) and buy the new imac 27 i5,or keep the one i have and buy more ram. I mostly use my computer for photoshop cs5 and illustrator cs5 for graphics out put as well as surfing the web and music.
Please give me you thoughts on what I should do!! Thanks lot!

The new iMac is about 25% or so faster than your current iMac(comparable model would be the 3.1ghz version). There are a couple of things that you will benefit from such as the dual Thunderbolt/Mini Display ports/ which may help with multitasking. The video card in the new iMac again the comparable model being the 3.1ghz is a lotttttttt better than the current one that you have. So thinking of the long run those few things may be beneficial for you to upgrade(but it depends on what is important to you).
I had the 2.93ghz i7 version that I just bought in March this year and I turned around and sold it about a week before the new iMac's were announced. I got about $1600 for it, yeah I took a loss but to me it was worth it because my new iMac performs that much better. Now keep in mind I went from i7 to i7...3.4ghz i7 with the 2gb video card. Now I have dual thuderbolt/mini display ports. I have noticed significant gains in my video editing and also in my gaming. So to me it was definitely worth the upgrade!
One last thing, I would not have sold my 2.93 i7 and then bought the 3.1ghz i5, the big reason is because HT(hyper threading), it's only on the i7 model(3.4ghz)... If you take a look at some of the bench marks on engadget, maclife, macrumors, macworld, ****Barefeats.com(they really get into benchmarking)*** you will see charts that will help you make a better decision.
In closing I would say look into it, if you can get a good price out of your current iMac to put toward a new iMac then do it. Like others have mentioned to you, tech changes and Apple will change the tech in these machines next year or do a speed bump later this year or so. One last thing if you go from the 2.8 i5 up to the 3.4 i7, you would definitely see the difference (HT is a must especially for programs that utilize it. You can go to my youtube channel(mob1278) and take a look at my geekbench results.... my 2.93 i7 scored around 10500-11000(8gb ram)...my 3.4 i7 scores from 12700-13000 with 4gb ram....so yeah as you can see big difference. Basically the 3.4 i7 would perform similar or just under a 2.4ghz 8core 2010 Mac Pro which runs you about $3500 with no monitor.... it's your money spend it how you want....and Lion is only going to push it even more when it is released!

K9NU Neo-V board with Corsair Twin2x2048 PC-6400-C4 RAM

Brothers,
Ran 3D'06 Mark on my new rig, got a score of 5028. Dunno if this is okay for my rig, but noticed a few odd things.
1. BIOS shows HT link frequency as 800 Mhz. For an AM2 platform, should'nt this be 1000 Mhz? Chipset voltage is 2.10v.
2. RAM frequency shows up as 368 Mhz on CPU-Z. I manually set it to 800 Mhz in the BIOS, still CPU-Z shows it as 368 Mhz. RAM voltage is 1.9. Anything wrong here?
3. My RAM is rated 4-4-4-12. What should be the TRRD and TRC values? I have them on auto now.
A few thoughts about point 2 above
My chipset frequency is 200 Mhz. and CPU multiplier is 11. This gives a CPU frequency of 2200Mhz, which I think is the rated frequency of my CPU.
However, RAM frequency is CPU Frequency / 6, which gives me the 368 Mhz. How do I get the full rated frequency of my RAM? Upping the CPU muliplier to 12? That would push my CPU to 2400 Mhz, and that divided by 6 will give me 400 Mhz for the RAM. Is this the right approach or is there a better way to do it? Do I need to up the CPU voltage also?
Not looking to set any records, but would like to get the most optimal settings for my hardware. Completely new to this kinda stuff, so would take a very conservative approach.
My rig details
AMD X2 4200+
Mainboard MSI K9-NeoV
Sapphire X1900Xt 256Mb
Corsair XMS2 Twin2x2048 PC6400-C4 @ 4-4-4-12
Seagate 7200.10 2x320GB Raid 1

You can use dual prime95 for stability testing
A guide here: http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16446 - It is important you do it like the guide sais and have 2 prime's running at the same time, each on one core.
If it survives a 12 hour prime95 run without any errors it is stable in my book
As for further tweaking you can (at your own risk!) try to tighten your ram timings, if you got good sticks they might be able to run cl3 if you give them some extra voltage - Athlon64 likes lower cas.
You can also try to overclock higher, with a little extra cpu and ram voltage (or ram on divider if you dont want to give it more voltage) your cpu should be able to hit at least 2600Mhz (with good cooling)...But you will have to drop HT multiplier for this, as HT will crash the system if it is pushed too far above 1000Mhz
But beware , if you do this, do it on a spare windows installation - if you oc too far and your system becomes unstable it can lead to harddrive data corruption.
Have fun & good luck.

How to change Virtual Memory in Windows 7 with SSD and 16GB RAM

I have SSD Samsung 850Pro with OS Windows 7 and have installed physical RAM 16GB.
In Adobe Help/Optimize performance/Photoshop written :
" To change Virtual Memory in Windows 7 and Vista, quit all applications and then do the following:
Choose Start > Control Panel, and double-click System.
Choose Advanced System Settings in the Tasks list.
Select the Advanced tab and click Settings in the Performance section.
Select the Advanced tab and click Change.
Deselect Automatically Manage Paging File Size For All Drives.
Click each hard disk letter to show the available space on that drive. Select a hard drive that has three times the amount of your computer’s installed RAM and doesn’t contain a scratch disk.
Select Custom Size, and type the amount of your physical RAM plus 300 MB in the Initial Size box. Type three times the amount of your computer’s installed RAM into the Maximum Size box.
Click Set, and then click OK. Continue to click OK to exit all dialog boxes.
Restart the computer: If you have applications open, select Restart Later, close your applications, then restart Windows. Otherwise, click Restart Now. "
Select Custom Size, and type the amount of your physical RAM plus 300 MB in the Initial Size box. Type three times the amount of your computer’s installed RAM into the Maximum Size box.
I have 16GB RAM
in the Initial Size box : 16384+300=16684MB
in the Maximum Size box:16684x3=50052MB
but in the description of SSD written :
" In order to address any potential lack of memory capacity, the Windows operating system automatically generates a block of virtual memory (pagefile.sys) on the C: drive. For example, a Windows® 7 64-bit system with 4 GB of physical memory would generate 4 GB of virtual memory at boot time.
In the past, before PC Memory (DRAM Modules) were available in high volume, PCs needed to utilize some HDD space to address any memory shortcomings. Today, with PCs featuring 4 GB of memory or more, it is possible to reduce or even eliminate the use of virtual memory. Additionally, using expanded physical memory, rather than creating virtual memory on the SSD, has performance and reliability advantages for the entire system. Some applications may require the use of virtual memory. In this case, please consider your specific application requirements before disabling this feature!!! ”..."SET virtual memory in the Initial Size Box :200MB and in the Maximum Size box: 2048MB"
what is the right choice ???
Please Help

Windows set to default virtual memory : 16348 MB =16GB !
But SSD program Samsung Magician wants virtual memory between in the Initial Size Box :200MB and in the Maximum Size box: 2048MB or 4096MB. If more than 8GB suggests that SSD will work slowly.
Perhaps the description in Adobe execution Help / Optimize / Photoshop is not correct or ?

RAID test on 8-core with real world tasks gives 9% gain?

Here are my results from testing the software RAID set up on my new (July 2009) Mac Pro. As you will see, although my 8-core (Octo) tested twice as fast as my new (March 2009) MacBook 2.4 GHz, the software RAID set up only gave me a 9% increase at best.
Specs:
Mac Pro 2x 2.26 GHz Quad-core Intel Xeon, 8 GB 1066 MHz DDR3, 4x 1TB 7200 Apple Drives.
MacBook 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4 GB 1067 MHz DDR3
Both running OS X 10.5.7
Canon Vixia HG20 HD video camera shooting in 1440 x 1080 resolution at “XP+” AVCHD format, 16:9 (wonderful camera)
The tests. (These are close to my real world “work flow” jobs that I would have to wait on when using my G5.)
Test A: import 5:00 of video into iMovie at 960x540 with thumbnails
Test B: render and export with Sepia applied to MPEG-4 at 960x540 (a 140 MB file) in iMovie
Test C: in QuickTime resize this MPEG-4 file to iPod size .m4v at 640x360 resolution
Results:
Control: MacBook as shipped
Test A: 4:16 (four minutes, sixteen seconds)
Test B: 13:28
Test C: 4:21
Control: Mac Pro as shipped (no RAID)
Test A: 1:50
Test B: 7:14
Test C: 2:22
Mac Pro config 1
RAID 0 (no RAID on the boot drive, three 1TB drives striped)
Test A: 1:44
Test B: 7:02
Test C: 2:23
Mac Pro config 2
RAID 10 (drives 1 and 2 mirrored, drives 3 and 4 mirrored, then both mirrors striped)
Test A: 1:40
Test B: 7:09
Test C: 2:23
My question: Why am I not seeing an increase in speed on these tasks? Any ideas?
David
Notes:
I took this to the Apple store and they were expecting 30 to 50 per cent increase with the software RAID. They don’t know why I didn’t see it on my tests.
I am using iMovie and QuickTime because I just got the Adobe CS4 and ran out of cash. And it is fine for my live music videos. Soon I will get Final Cut Studio.
I set up the RAID with Disk Utility without trouble. (It crashed once but reopened and set up just fine.) If I check back it shows the RAID set up working.
Activity Monitor reported “disk activity” peaks at about 8 MB/sec on both QuickTime and iMovie tasks. The CPU number (percent?) on QT was 470 (5 cores involved?) and iMovie was 294 (3 cores involved?).
Console reported the same error for iMovie and QT:
7/27/09 11:05:35 AM iMovie[1715] Error loading /Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/HAL/DVCPROHDAudio.plugin/Contents/MacOS/DVCPROHDAudio: dlopen(/Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/HAL/DVCPROHDAudio.plugin/Contents/MacOS/DVCPROHD Audio, 262): Symbol not found: _keymgr_get_per_threaddata
Referenced from: /Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/HAL/DVCPROHDAudio.plugin/Contents/MacOS/DVCPROHDAudio
Expected in: /usr/lib/libSystem.B.dylib

The memory controllers, one for each cpu, means that you need at least 2 x 2GB on each bank. If that is how Apple set it up, that is minimal and the only thing I would do now with RAM is add another 2 x 2GB. That's all. And get you into triple channel bandwidth.
It could be the make and model of your hard drives. If they are seagate then more info would help. And not all drives are equal when it comes to RAID.
Are you new to RAID or something you've been doing? seems you had enough to build 0+1 and do some testing. Though not pleased, even if it works now, that it didn't take the one time.
Drives - and RAIDs - improve over the first week or two - which, before commiting good data to them - is the best time to torture, run them ragged, use Speedtools to break them in, loosen up the heads, scan for media errors, and run ZoneBench (and with 1TB, partition each drive into 1/4ths).
If Drive A is not identical to B, then they may deal with an array even worse. And no two drives are purly identical, some vary more than others, and some are best used in hardware RAID controller environments.
Memory: buying in groups of three. okay. But then adding 4 x 4GB? So bank A with 4 x 2GB and B with twice as much memory. On Mac Pro, 4 DIMMs on a bank you get 70% bandwidth, it drops down from tri-channel to dual-channel mode.
I studied how to build or put together a PC for over six months, but then learned more in the month (or two) after I bought all the parts, found what didn't work, learned my own short-comings, and ended up building TWO - one for testing, other for backup system. And three motherboards (the best 'rated' also had more trouble with BIOS and fans, the cheap one was great, the Intel board that reviewers didn't seem to "gork" actually has been the best and easiest to use and update BIOS). Hands on wins 3:1 versus trying to learn by reading for me, hands-on is what I need to learn. Or take car or sailboat out for drive, spin, see how it fares in rough weather.
I buy an Apple system bare bones, stock, or less, then do all the upgrades on my own, when I can afford to, gradually over months, year.
Each cpu needs to be fed. So they each need at least 3 x 1GB RAM. And they need raw data fed to RAM and cpu from disk drives. And your mix of programs will each behave differently. Which is why you see Barefeats test with Pro Apps, CINEBENCH, and other apps or tools.
What did you read or do in the past that led you to think you need RAID setup, and for how it would affect performance?
Photoshop Guides to Performance:
http://homepage.mac.com/boots911/.Public/PhotoshopAccelerationBasics2.4W.pdf
http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/401/kb401089.html
http://www.macgurus.com/guides/storageaccelguide.php
4-core vs 8-core
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal08.html
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal03.html

Having a hellish time with a raid 5 array in one of my Mac Pros

Seems that after a hiccup and a freeze that required a hard restart things have been going downhill.
Nothing but a gray screen after the restart and then had to start from an external drive.
Raid utility showed 2 of the 3 drives in the raid set as roaming but in good condition. The third drive that was associated with the raid set and in good condition, but the raid set itself wasn't viable. Guess this due to the other 2 drives roaming.
After reseating all the drives and the raid card then starting again, the raid utility now shows all three drives roaming but in good condition. There is no raid set defined.
Would I be able to just create a new raid set using those three drives and everything will be happy once again or will I lose data if I do this?
There isn't alot of information that I've found that pertains to this situation.
It also has the newer raid card.

You might be better posting in the Mac Pro forum (as the Mac Pro specialists will be there). This is the Power Mac forum.

Whis is better: 8GB RAM with 2TB RAID 0 Scratch or 16GB RAM with 32GB SSD?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for