Jump to content
RESET Forums (homeservershow.com)

Performance comparison HP SA P222 versus P212


Recommended Posts

For supported OS, HP SIM can give you a bunch of reporting capabiliy.http://www8.hp.com/us/en/products/server-software/product-detail.html?oid=489496

I 'assume' the P212 data would be picked up by HP SIM.

Thank you for your answers!

Last but not the least, are you using a battery BBWC with your p212?

And is the 512 memory module wortht it against 256 one?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally pulled the trigger and ordered a P222 off of eBay.  This should be interesting :) ..............................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm going to posit the differences in the P212 vs P222 battle won't be found in day-to-day performance of disks; or more specifically, if you ran spinning-platter disks as non-RAID, RAID-0, RAID-1, or RAID-10, arrays that require no parity calculations.


The significant differences I think you'll find between the two are going to be where RAID-parity calculations are necessary.  This includes performance in RAID-5/RAID-6/RAID-50/RAID-60, both in RAID creation, realtime parity calculations, and RAID-rebuild time.  This would be a really big deal in a RAID-6 or RAID-60 (striped RAID-6), because a RAID-6 array requires double the parity calculations of RAID-5.


There is one other place the P222 may show some performance gains.  Its cache in theory has more bandwidth; it's DDR3, vs. the DDR2 cache of the P212.  This probably doesn't come into play under lighter I/O loads but may do so under more sustained ones.  For either controller, if you want high performance, the larger cache modules are 72-bits wide, while the smaller ones (256MB on the P212, 512MB on the P222) are 40-bits wide.  A 72-bit module will provide greater performance as well as having more memory to cache with.  Note:  HP lists the 256MB cache on the P212 and the 512MB cache on the P222 as having the same maximum bandwidth (4.2GB/second) which I find a little odd; it could be that due to the layout, HP isn't providing additional bandwidth with the new cache module, just power savings (DDR3 uses less voltage).


All of this is theory, and would require benchmarking to bear out, but due to an actual new processor on the P222 and notes in HP's white papers, I believe the theory is sound.  There should be more performance; how much would take lab testing.  Also note that if you run SSD arrays, you may actually get a benefit from the 6Gbps channels on the P222 that you wouldn't when using regular hard drives.


TLDR version - The P222's performance increases are probably found mostly in parity-driven RAID sets, especially in RAID arrays many home server enthusiasts don't use (RAID-6/RAID-60).

Edited by LoneWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...