JorgeB Posted October 8, 2023 Author Share Posted October 8, 2023 19 hours ago, DNU said: Do you know why CRC failed on test No 4,8 ? Possibly a bad port or cable. Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted October 8, 2023 Author Share Posted October 8, 2023 7 minutes ago, DNU said: You might focus on comparing run no 8 vs 9., Just wired a little differently but the results are totally different, It's very strange. That doesn't make much sense, and if you use two different expander ports? Quote Link to comment
mans_ Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 Hi! I'm trying to understand if there will be a bandwidth difference between Asmedia ASM1166 PCIe gen3 x2 slot card and Asmedia ASM1166 PCIe gen3 x1 slot card? Quote Link to comment
SunSh4dow Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 Hi, I planed on using my B550 AORUS PRO V2 for an unraid build. In intended on using 6 HDDs (~260 MBs max) for the array (possibly adding more in the future) and 2 mirrored NVMEs for cache/appdata, possibly adding 2 normal SSDs for whatever. I thought about getting a LSI 9305-16i instead of the LSI SAS2008 - mainly because the 2008 is rather old by now and I read a lot about trouble with TRIM signals, as well as reaching lower C-States. 1. Question: Would the 9305-16i improve on that? Besides that, when I looked into my mainboards specs, its 2 additional x16 slots (the main will hold a GPU) have rather wild asterix to them: - 1 x PCI Express x16 slot (PCIEX4), integrated in the Chipset: - Supporting PCIe 3.0 x4 mode (* The M2B_SB connector shares bandwidth with the PCIEX4 slot. The PCIEX4 slot will become unavailable when an SSD is installed in the M2B_SB connectors.) - 1 x PCI Express x16 slot (PCIEX2), integrated in the Chipset: - Supporting PCIe 3.0 x2 mode (* The PCIEX2 slot shares bandwidth with the SATA3 4, 5 connectors. The PCIEX2 slot will become unavailable when a device is installed in the SATA3 4 or SATA3 5 connector.) It also has 2 NVME slots. In my research, I learned that it yeets all the storage besides the main NVME slot through its storage controller, which seems to be PCIe3 x4. Since I wanted to use both NVME slots, I would be forced to use PCIEX2. Now, Im at a loss how that would function/what would happen, would I slot the 9305-16i in there. It's a PCIe3x8 card - and as far as I understand, it would get the PCIe3x2 as mentioned above. That would be about 2000 MB/s - enough for 8 HDDs. But does it actually work that way? Would, since the card is x8, only certain connectors function? I figure it's all rather suboptimal, considering everything, even SSDs on the MB SATA would share the bandwith, as well as one of the nvmes? Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted January 16 Author Share Posted January 16 18 hours ago, SunSh4dow said: 1. Question: Would the 9305-16i improve on that? If you meant lower C-States I cannot answer, I have some but never checked that. 18 hours ago, SunSh4dow said: - 1 x PCI Express x16 slot (PCIEX4), integrated in the Chipset: - Supporting PCIe 3.0 x4 mode This is not ideal, since it's only x4 and shares the DMI with SATA controller, etc, but if it's the only option it should still give decent performance. Quote Link to comment
AlphaXL Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) Quote LSI 9300-8i PCIe gen3 x8 (4800MB/s with the SATA3 devices used for this test) - LSI 3008 chipset 8 x 565MB/s (425MB/s*, 380MB/s**) How was the 8x425MB/s achieved on 9300-8i? According to spec the card has 12Gb/s throughput only, meaning 1.5GB/s. The 1.5GB/s limit I also experience on my system: Where am I bottlenecking or do I misunderstand something? Edited March 18 by AlphaXL Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 46 minutes ago, AlphaXL said: According to spec the card has 12Gb/s throughput only, meaning 1.5GB/s. The card is capable of 12Gbps per port, that's 1200MB/s (with SAS3 devices, it will be 6Gbps per port with SATA max). also 1.5GB/s not the same as 1.5Gbps 47 minutes ago, AlphaXL said: The 1.5GB/s limit I also experience on my system: Likely the HBA is not linking at full speed/width, post the output of: lspci -d 1000: -vv Quote Link to comment
AlphaXL Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) Quote 03:00.0 Serial Attached SCSI controller: Broadcom / LSI SAS3008 PCI-Express Fusion-MPT SAS-3 (rev 02) Subsystem: Broadcom / LSI SAS9300-8i Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 16 Region 0: I/O ports at e000 Region 1: Memory at df140000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) Region 3: Memory at df100000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) Expansion ROM at df000000 [disabled] Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 3 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-) Status: D0 NoSoftRst+ PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- Capabilities: [68] Express (v2) Endpoint, MSI 00 DevCap: MaxPayload 4096 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <64ns, L1 <1us ExtTag+ AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset+ SlotPowerLimit 0W DevCtl: CorrErr+ NonFatalErr+ FatalErr+ UnsupReq+ RlxdOrd+ ExtTag+ PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ FLReset- MaxPayload 256 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes DevSta: CorrErr- NonFatalErr- FatalErr- UnsupReq- AuxPwr- TransPend- LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 8GT/s, Width x8, ASPM not supported ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- ASPMOptComp+ LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes, Disabled- CommClk- ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt- LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s (downgraded), Width x4 (downgraded) TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt- DevCap2: Completion Timeout: Range BC, TimeoutDis+ NROPrPrP- LTR- 10BitTagComp- 10BitTagReq- OBFF Not Supported, ExtFmt- EETLPPrefix- EmergencyPowerReduction Not Supported, EmergencyPowerReductionInit- FRS- TPHComp- ExtTPHComp- AtomicOpsCap: 32bit- 64bit- 128bitCAS- DevCtl2: Completion Timeout: 50us to 50ms, TimeoutDis- LTR- 10BitTagReq- OBFF Disabled, AtomicOpsCtl: ReqEn- LnkCap2: Supported Link Speeds: 2.5-8GT/s, Crosslink- Retimer- 2Retimers- DRS- LnkCtl2: Target Link Speed: 8GT/s, EnterCompliance- SpeedDis- Transmit Margin: Normal Operating Range, EnterModifiedCompliance- ComplianceSOS- Compliance Preset/De-emphasis: -6dB de-emphasis, 0dB preshoot LnkSta2: Current De-emphasis Level: -6dB, EqualizationComplete- EqualizationPhase1- EqualizationPhase2- EqualizationPhase3- LinkEqualizationRequest- Retimer- 2Retimers- CrosslinkRes: unsupported Capabilities: [a8] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable+ 64bit+ Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000 Masking: 00000000 Pending: 00000000 Capabilities: [c0] MSI-X: Enable+ Count=96 Masked- Vector table: BAR=1 offset=0000e000 PBA: BAR=1 offset=0000f000 Capabilities: [100 v2] Advanced Error Reporting UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UESvrt: DLP+ SDES+ TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- CESta: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- AdvNonFatalErr- CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- AdvNonFatalErr+ AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, ECRCGenCap- ECRCGenEn- ECRCChkCap- ECRCChkEn- MultHdrRecCap- MultHdrRecEn- TLPPfxPres- HdrLogCap- HeaderLog: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 Capabilities: [1e0 v1] Secondary PCI Express LnkCtl3: LnkEquIntrruptEn- PerformEqu- LaneErrStat: 0 Capabilities: [1c0 v1] Power Budgeting <?> Capabilities: [190 v1] Dynamic Power Allocation <?> Capabilities: [148 v1] Alternative Routing-ID Interpretation (ARI) ARICap: MFVC- ACS-, Next Function: 0 ARICtl: MFVC- ACS-, Function Group: 0 Kernel driver in use: mpt3sas Kernel modules: mpt3sas "LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s (downgraded), Width x4 (downgraded)" Does that mean my motherboard doesn't have enough lanes? I have "ASRock B365M Phantom Gaming 4" motherboard. https://pg.asrock.com/mb/Intel/B365M Phantom Gaming 4/index.asp#Specification HBA card is in PCIe x4 slot as it does not work in the x16 slot. Both M.2 slots have NVMe installed also. Edited March 18 by AlphaXL Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 Just now, AlphaXL said: Does that mean my motherboard doesn't have enough lanes? It's only linking at PCIe 1.0 speeds, and also only x4, what is the board model and slot where it is installed? Quote Link to comment
AlphaXL Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) 5 minutes ago, JorgeB said: It's only linking at PCIe 1.0 speeds, and also only x4, what is the board model and slot where it is installed? Sorry, edited the previous post. I have "ASRock B365M Phantom Gaming 4" motherboard. https://pg.asrock.com/mb/Intel/B365M Phantom Gaming 4/index.asp#Specification HBA card is in PCIe x4 slot (named PCIE3, the very bottom one) as it does not work in the x16 slot. Both M.2 slots have NVMe installed also. Edited March 18 by AlphaXL Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 33 minutes ago, AlphaXL said: HBA card is in PCIe x4 slot (named PCIE3, the very bottom one) OK, the x4 is normal, not normal only linking at PCIe 1.0, check the bard BIOS to see if the PICe slot link is limited. Quote Link to comment
AlphaXL Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 6 minutes ago, JorgeB said: OK, the x4 is normal, not normal only linking at PCIe 1.0, check the bard BIOS to see if the PICe slot link is limited. I tried Auto and also to force it into Gen3. lspci command still gives the identical output. Motherboard and HBA card both have the latest BIOS. I have tried resetting both also. Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 Possibly some board compatibility issue with the HBA, probably not much else you can do other than using a different one if available. Quote Link to comment
AlphaXL Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) So... if the lspci command says that the HBA card link speed is "downgraded" it would indicate that the card itself is capable of higher link speeds and the issue is not with the HBA card but with the motherboard? Would there be any point to get a Z390 board (as I want to keep the CPU and MEM modules the same) to get rid of the PCIe 1.0 x4 bottleneck? I have 7 drives connected to HBA card currently. If I add the 8th drive the speed of each drive would drop even more? As the 1.5GB/s throughput gets divided between all drives. Edited March 18 by AlphaXL Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted March 18 Author Share Posted March 18 5 minutes ago, AlphaXL said: itself is capable of higher link speeds and the issue is not with the HBA card but with the motherboard? Correct. 6 minutes ago, AlphaXL said: Would there be any point to get a Z390 board (as I want to keep the CPU and MEM modules the same) to get rid of the PCIe 1.0 x4 bottleneck? It should help, as long as compatible, using a different brand board where it would work in the GPU slot would also solve the issue. 7 minutes ago, AlphaXL said: If I add the 8th drive the speed of each drive would drop even more? Yep. Quote Link to comment
AlphaXL Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Thanks for your comments, much appreciated✌️ 1 Quote Link to comment
sluggathor Posted Tuesday at 09:48 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 09:48 PM On 9/21/2015 at 4:47 PM, JorgeB said: *Despite being DMI 3.0** , Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, Comet Lake and Alder Lake chipsets have a max combined bandwidth of approximately 2GB/s for the onboard SATA ports. How did you get that information? What about a W480 chipset with 8 SATA ports? (Gigabyte W480M Vision W) Quote Link to comment
JorgeB Posted 21 hours ago Author Share Posted 21 hours ago 9 hours ago, sluggathor said: How did you get that information? By testing them myself. 9 hours ago, sluggathor said: W480 chipset Ever tested this one, but would be surprised if it's not the same. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.