Apple Event: May 7th at 7 am PT

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

Mac Pro 1.1 set up using RAID 0 (2 x SSDs SATA III) and PCIe card. Installed the two SSDs in RAID 0 via StarTech's StarTech ePCI SATA III RAID controller card with mini-SAS (PEXSAT34SFF). Slower than RAID without card. Different card need?

Mac Pro 1.1 set up using RAID 0 (2 x SSDs SATA III) and PCIe card. Installed the two SSDs in RAID 0 via StarTech's StarTech ePCI SATA III RAID controller card with mini-SAS (PEXSAT34SFF). Slower than RAID without card. Different card needed?

The speeds on Nova Bench were:

2 x SSB SATA III in RAID (striped) with ePCI = 82 MB/s

2 x SSB SATA III in RAID (striped) without ePCI = 126 MB/s

i am a teacher trying to produce video learning resources on a minimum budget. Hence trying to upgrade a secondhand Mac Pro 1.1 . I've upgraded the RAM to 26 Gb. If some kind sould out there to me to buy such-and-such a card and which internal connections to make i could attain faster read and write speeds i would be a happy man. Both speeds seem well below par, even for an old Mac Pro 1.1.

cheers

Mac Pro, Mac OS X (10.6.1), Mac Pro 1.1, SSD SATA III, PCIe

Posted on Feb 3, 2014 8:10 AM

17 replies

The hatter

Level 9

60,990 points

Feb 5, 2014 5:07 AM in response to London artist teacher

No one supports booting 1,1 with PCIe SSDs. No one.

I don't see how the Sole x1 "surpasses" benefit of RAID increase.

One way to use a card is as JBOD.

A single 500GB with a low end card... what are you going to use the two 256GB (ps: Gb = gigabit, GB = gigabyte, 10:1 difference)

And I will harp on..,. there is no real world benefit booting from PCIe SSD vs SATA II - the improvement in IOPS and reads is what matters most.

One guy tested three PCIe cards, 2-3 different makes of SSD, and a few benchmarks.

Even a 2009 4,1 - if you tried to use two PCIe cards, and 4 x SSDs it is hampered by the fact a 4,1 sharess and does not have slots #3 & 4 on independent channels so instead of 2 x 900MB/sec it was less.

Seems like the 2010/2012 5,1 is the only model to finally resolve or finally have a fully functional system. From 2006 to 2010. You get better PCIe support for booting, performance.

RatVega™

Level 4

2,005 points

Feb 5, 2014 7:27 AM in response to London artist teacher

Well, this has shaken out quite nicely just as I hoped it would... I had to author a DVD so I was offline for a while.

London:

If it were me (which it is not...) I'd just park the SSDs under the SuperDrive using the system's SATA II ports and save the PCI slots for other expansion. I'd use one SSD for System/Apps/Library and the other as a target for Compressor (which really likes fast drives.) That leaves the four 3.5" slots for large data drives. With the money I didn't spend on PCIe sleds for the SSDs I'd try to squeeze out an ATI 5770 video card.

As I said before, I understand the allure of a RAID. I just had to have one as well and spent $1200 to build one in a dual processor G4... but then, I also put a 600 hp Big Block Chevy engine in a Vega once. Actually, I don't regret either decision but both were a source of aggravation at times.

As a Friend once told me: "It's your Circus, you can have as many clowns as you like."

The very best luck to you and a big Thank You to The Hatter for his help!