Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Should I setup two Intel 520 Series 120gb in a Raid 0 configuration

Tags:
  • NAS / RAID
  • Configuration
  • Intel
  • Components
Last response: in Components
Share
August 17, 2013 11:05:51 AM

I already have one intel 520 120gb. Should I buy another one to setup a Raid 0 configuration. I want my applications to load faster when I turn them on. I do a lot of multitasking with many applications running at once. I don't really care about the write speed. I only care about loading programs faster. The slightest lag even bothers me. Your opinion is greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Also, I heard you can use the Intel RST drivers to get full TRIM support. Can someone validate this for me?

More about : setup intel 520 series 120gb raid configuration

August 17, 2013 11:13:12 AM

bwongster said:
I already have one intel 520 120gb. Should I buy another one to setup a Raid 0 configuration. I want my applications to load faster when I turn them on. I do a lot of multitasking with many applications running at once. I don't really care about the write speed. I only care about loading programs faster. The slightest lag even bothers me. Your opinion is greatly appreciated. Thanks!


What motherboard are you using? If you are using a motherboard that only supports sata 2 you will gain ALOT from raid.
m
0
l
Related resources
August 17, 2013 11:14:37 AM

oczdude8 said:
bwongster said:
I already have one intel 520 120gb. Should I buy another one to setup a Raid 0 configuration. I want my applications to load faster when I turn them on. I do a lot of multitasking with many applications running at once. I don't really care about the write speed. I only care about loading programs faster. The slightest lag even bothers me. Your opinion is greatly appreciated. Thanks!


What motherboard are you using? If you are using a motherboard that only supports sata 2 you will gain ALOT from raid.


My motherboard only supports sata II. But if I had sata III wouldn't it be faster on a Raid 0 setup?
m
0
l
a b å Intel
August 17, 2013 11:46:37 AM

bwongster said:

My motherboard only supports sata II. But if I had sata III wouldn't it be faster on a Raid 0 setup?


Not necessarily, no. RAID 0 is not always 'faster'. For some operations, yes. For others...not so much.
Moving large items in and out? Yes. Random reads, as in the case of normal everyday ops are sometimes slower.
Remember, the data has to go through the RAID, and then talk to two different drives. Rather than just talking to the one drive initially.

On my system, I have 2 SSDs. Non RAID, just two regular drives.
OS and applications on one, working data on the other. Opening a moderately complex Excel spreadsheet (that lives on the other SSD) is near instantaneous. It is open almost before my finger stop moving from the click. Opening that exact same file on my work PC (no RAID, no SSD) is some seconds.

A RAID 0 is great if you need constant fallback in case a drive dies. For instance if you were operating a public web server, and cannot afford any hesitation in service due to a dead disk.
For overall speed, with already fast SSDs, in everyday ops? Doubtful you'd see any real improvement. Add in the increased possibility of array failure...

Try it as just two independent drives.
m
0
l
August 17, 2013 1:27:30 PM

bwongster said:
oczdude8 said:
bwongster said:
I already have one intel 520 120gb. Should I buy another one to setup a Raid 0 configuration. I want my applications to load faster when I turn them on. I do a lot of multitasking with many applications running at once. I don't really care about the write speed. I only care about loading programs faster. The slightest lag even bothers me. Your opinion is greatly appreciated. Thanks!


What motherboard are you using? If you are using a motherboard that only supports sata 2 you will gain ALOT from raid.


My motherboard only supports sata II. But if I had sata III wouldn't it be faster on a Raid 0 setup?


that article toms did was based on sata 3, and has no useful info regarding on raid practises based on a sata 2 system.

I also have a sata 2 system.

I use 2 Samsung 830 ssds in raid 0 and get about 500mb/s read/write, since I am using them in raid.

if I use them separately, I get a max of 250mb/s read/write which is the maximum limit for the SATA 2 port (bottleneck)
if I had a sata 3 mobo, each ssd should get around 500mb/s by itself, but since I don't I MUST raid them.

I have tried both cases in real world applications and it raid was obviously a winner.

If you had a sata 3 system, there would not be a need to raid, since after 500mb/s you wont see any real wolrd differences (see toms article), but on a sata 2 system, you will instantly feel the speed.
m
0
l

Best solution

August 17, 2013 1:29:33 PM

USAFRet said:
bwongster said:

My motherboard only supports sata II. But if I had sata III wouldn't it be faster on a Raid 0 setup?


Not necessarily, no. RAID 0 is not always 'faster'. For some operations, yes. For others...not so much.
Moving large items in and out? Yes. Random reads, as in the case of normal everyday ops are sometimes slower.
Remember, the data has to go through the RAID, and then talk to two different drives. Rather than just talking to the one drive initially.

On my system, I have 2 SSDs. Non RAID, just two regular drives.
OS and applications on one, working data on the other. Opening a moderately complex Excel spreadsheet (that lives on the other SSD) is near instantaneous. It is open almost before my finger stop moving from the click. Opening that exact same file on my work PC (no RAID, no SSD) is some seconds.

A RAID 0 is great if you need constant fallback in case a drive dies. For instance if you were operating a public web server, and cannot afford any hesitation in service due to a dead disk.
For overall speed, with already fast SSDs, in everyday ops? Doubtful you'd see any real improvement. Add in the increased possibility of array failure...

Try it as just two independent drives.


I think you are confusing raid 0. It is not offer any form of redundancy and it is used purely for speed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels
Share
a b å Intel
August 17, 2013 2:01:27 PM

oczdude8 said:


I think you are confusing raid 0. It is not offer any form of redundancy and it is used purely for speed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels


I know exactly what the different RAID levels are.
Go for it if you want. I wouldn't bother.
m
0
l
August 17, 2013 9:47:39 PM

Ok. I have decided to not to go raid 0. Thank you everyone.
m
0
l
!