1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Storage C300 128GB + Highpoint Rocket 620

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by stevenrlp, 8 Sep 2010.

  1. stevenrlp

    stevenrlp New Member

    Joined:
    23 May 2010
    Posts:
    53
    Likes Received:
    2
    I have just received a Highpoint Rocket 620 card from Scan today as per BT's advice on the premium player rig and I am very disappointed with its performance. My onboard SATA3 ports read speeds are much faster and my startup and shutdown times are increased with the addition of this card, the only positive thing about this card is that the write speeds are slightly faster. my question is am I doing something wrong with this card to be getting such low read speeds. I have installed the card into a PCI-E X16 port on my motherboard and I am only getting an average read speeds of about 280mb/s via HD tune, I have also tested with ATTO, BT's review on the C300 64GB / 256GB boasted read speeds of 350mb/s so what on earth am I doing wrong? :wallbash:
     
  2. hotnikkelz

    hotnikkelz New Member

    Joined:
    28 May 2009
    Posts:
    258
    Likes Received:
    4
    I dunno why bit tech recommends the rocket. It's trash from what i gather from my buddies who got it. I think it's the lack of PIC 6GBps cards out there
     
  3. PocketDemon

    PocketDemon New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    2,107
    Likes Received:
    139
    Ummm... How strange...

    Well, a quick check of the mobo manual &, whilst the 2nd & 4th of the 16x slots are only 8x electrical (not quite sure why they're recommending that SLi is best in 1st & 2nd), they're all 2.0 so 'should' have no issue.

    1st thing to try would be sticking it in the other 16x slots to see if that helps...

    & 2nd, since you've not mentioned the OS or installation method (a fresh install of Vista/Win7 should be fine, but i've no idea what OS you're actually running/whether you've imaged across from a HDD/what else you might have done), would be to check the alignment.

    in windows (you'd have to look it up for other OSes), this is done by going to -

    Start -> Run --> (typing) msinfo32

    & then in the msinfo window going to - Components -> Storage --> Disks ---> Partition Starting Offset (obviously for the SSD)

    Now this 'should' be exactly divisible by 4096...


    Otherwise, although that HighPoint thing 'should' allow a single C300 to run at something approaching advertised speeds (& there's enough people on here who seem to have gotten good results once it's been put in a 2.0 slot), my issue (yet again) is that it's a really poor investment since, whilst cheap, it can only support a single C300 (or any other >3Gb/s SSD when they arrive) & so is a major barrier to upgrading...

    ...esp for those who've bought a 64GB one as these are woefully small for anything other than a fairly basic install.
     
  4. stevenrlp

    stevenrlp New Member

    Joined:
    23 May 2010
    Posts:
    53
    Likes Received:
    2
    First off like I said above I have installed it into my second PCI-E X16 as the first PCI-E X16 is taken up by my GTX 480, I found that when I installed the card into a 8X or 1X the speed of the rocket card decreased massively. I have also noticed that the speed of the C300 can be effected by enabling C1E in the Bios, when C1E is on I am getting read speeds of about 240MB/s and when its turned off I am getting 280MB/s, how strange. My whole system is new and I have installed it all correctly so its not something simple like I have forgotten to plug this or that in. I did what you said above and looked at my system information and my Partition Starting Offset for 0: (100mb windows 7 boot partition) is set to 105,906,176 bytes and my Partition Starting Offset for 1: is 105,906,176 bytes. I am running windows 7 ultimate x64 7600 RTM which I freshly installed from boot last night and fully updated.

    I really think bit-tech should remove this card from their premium player rig, its just a big waste of money.
     
  5. PocketDemon

    PocketDemon New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    2,107
    Likes Received:
    139
    Well, your off-set looks to be absolutely fine so that's not the cause...


    & trying other slots is simply one of those things that's always worth a go - along with it not being 100% clear whether you were meaning a 16x physical or 16x electrical slot...

    ...according to page 7 of the manual then it's the 1st & 3rd slots which are 16x electrical - though as all of them are 2.0 compatible & it's only a 1x card then there 'should' be no issue.


    The only other thing i can quickly think of is to check to see if there's a bios update for the mobo - or i guess a firmware update for highpoint card though this is much less likely to be the cause of any issue...
     
  6. sirsiddius

    sirsiddius New Member

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2010
    Posts:
    179
    Likes Received:
    14
    AFAIK both the highpoint rocket raid, and the mobo sata 6gb implementations use the same Marvel controller, so I don't know why BT always claims the highpoint is the best SATA 6gb solution. All sata 6gb solutions should preform identically given that you don't overload the motherboard with usb 3.0 devices which share bandwidth with the sata 6gbs controller.
     
  7. delpy8

    delpy8 New Member

    Joined:
    8 Oct 2008
    Posts:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi forum,

    is it worth my while getting the highpoint rocket raid 620 raid pci-e card and raid 0 two
    crucial c300 128gb,

    if so how easy is it to do a new install of win7 64bit as the Highpoint websites instructions are confusing

    Thanks
     
  8. madbstd

    madbstd New Member

    Joined:
    14 Jun 2011
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rocket 620A Too Slow

    I just arranged to RMA this card as after a week of rubbish speeds and 'No Driver Found' problems its going back. I bought this on the advice of BitTech for my new OCZ Vertex 3 as my Asus Maximus Formula (X38) only has SATA 2 ports. I ran OCZWinsat benchmark and got 200MB/S seq read and 120MB/S seq write 'not quite' the expected 550MB/S and 500MB/S. Swapped the drive to a SATA 2 mobo port and got 270MB/S and 256MB/S respectively. Not impressed! The CD contained no drivers for the card for Windows 7 and Highpoints website states its driverless. Why then does device manager say 'Unknown Marvell 91XX ATA Config Device'?

    Found a driver for the chipset on Station-Drivers from Marvell but the speeds were the same so luckily Scan are letting me send it back. My PCI-E slots are 2.0 and it was put into the PCI-E X1 slot as the instructions state. Crystal Disk Info states the transfer mode as SATA 600 so you'd think all would be well. Was hoping not to have to splash out on a P67 board just yet but looks like I have to as these cards with an SSD or at least the Vertex 3 don't seem to mix well and I have seen others on the OCZ forum with the same problem. :wallbash:

    Sorry for the rant just been tearing my hari out trying to work out what the problem is.
     
  9. Apocalypso

    Apocalypso Fully armed and operational.

    Joined:
    15 Sep 2007
    Posts:
    1,141
    Likes Received:
    68
    I bought a Rocket Highpoint 620 from Scan and had no end of issues with drive recognition. It was quite happy to pick up a sata 2 spinpoint f3 but refused to pick up my sata 3 c300.

    I updated the firmware, drivers etc all to no avail so I bought an Asus U3S6 which worked first time, the Highpoint card has since been returned and I'm now a happy chap.
     
  10. PocketDemon

    PocketDemon New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    2,107
    Likes Received:
    139
    Right, afaik (quick check of the Asus website & based on my x48 Asus boards), you've mis-read the spec of your 1x pcie slots.

    Whilst the two 16x slots are 2.0, the 1x slots are only 1.0.

    This means that the card was only getting a theoretical maximum bandwidth of 250MB/s which, after overheads, gets reduced still further (to what you actually got).

    Now, unless you're prepared to sacrifice one of the 16x slots, no card that you put in there will get you better results than what you've seen & it would be a waste of time & money to try.
     
  11. felixw

    felixw New Member

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2008
    Posts:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    hi,

    whoever has posted that he has low performance with this card, would it be easy to post the results of some benchmark, e.g. AS-SSD , for the rest to see the max performance of this card?
     

Share This Page