RAID Problems With Intel Core 2?

Nom du Keyboard writes "The Inquirer is reporting that the new Intel Core 2 processors Woodcrest and Conroe are suffering badly when running RAID 5 disk arrays, even when using non-Intel controllers. Can Intel afford to make a misstep now with even in the small subset of users running RAID 5 systems?" From the article: "The performance in benchmarks is there, but the performance in real world isn't. While synthetic benchmarks will do the thing and show RAID5-worthy results, CPU utilization will go through the roof no matter what CPU is used, and the hiccups will occur every now and then. It remains to be seen whether this can be fixed via BIOS or micro-code update."

Comments

don't worry

[sum.zero]

it's not a bug, just errata ;)

sum.zero

Re:don't worry

[Tackhead]

> it's not a bug, just errata ;)

Where's the bug? My RAID 0+0.999999998 works just fine Intel Core 1.99904274017.

Re:Won't matter for most users

[Anonymous Coward]

cat coke | nose > keyboard

Re:Won't matter for most users

[firl]

Well, my 60 hard drive array provides much better heating than my 4 processor sparc server

Is the sky falling?

[DysenteryInTheRanks]

Can Intel afford to make a misstep now with even in the small subset of users running RAID 5 systems?

No. No, it cannot. Sell your stock. Rip the CPU out of your boxen. One hundred ten billion dollars in market capitalization has disappeared in a flash with the publication of this groundbreaking article in the Inquirer.

Intel has signed its own death warrant. As goes RAID5, so goes the world.

Re:Why aren't you running a dedicated controller..

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's as if there can't be any gray area in the matter."

No, the problem is that there's no grey matter in the area.

Re:Why aren't you running a dedicated controller..

[courtarro]

I've never heard it called FAKERAID maybe it should just be called FAID? I'll file that one back for use later...

No, it's aFRAID array. Oops, forgot the space.