Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

windows 8.1 ssd RAID 0 after HDD not seen as SSD

Last response: in Windows 8
Share
January 13, 2014 9:40:23 AM

Hi,

I've seen numerous posts on Win8.1 not seeing system SSD disks, especially in RAID configurations. My problem is a bit different. I have the following config:

C:\ = RAID 1 SSD - 2 X Samsung 840 PRO Port 1 & 2 on RAID ctrlr (256 GB Total storage)
D:\ = RAID 1 HDD - 2 X Hitachi 7K4000 Port 3 & 4 on RAID ctrlr (4 TB total storage)
T:\ = RAID 0 SSD - 2 X Samsung 840 PRO Port 5 & 6 on RAID ctrlr (512 GB total)

I am using windows 8.1 on an Asus Maximus VI Formula board with an Intel 4770K processor and 32 GB of Munchkin Redline memory.

Windows correctly sees C:\ as an SDD and D:\ as an HDD, and will optimize each properly (i.e. trim and defrag).

Windows sees the T:\ disk as an HDD too, and optimize here will try to defrag the SDD. Not a good idea, so I turned off auto optimize.

Additionally, I'd think the T:\ disk works better as several trim-aware utilities tell me the trim feature doesn't work on the C:\ disk...even though windows seems to do the trim when optimizing the disk. But these same utilities DO notice the T disk will trim...it's just Windows thinks it's an HDD.

No number of WEI runs will make this disk be seen as an SSD...what I can do to get this to go? Do I need to move around the disks on the RAID adapter (internal Intel) or change the volume's disk letter?

Thanks,

Ambidexter
a b * Windows 8
January 13, 2014 10:04:41 AM

Are allRaid-0 is onl the devices on the Intel 6gb sata ports?

Windows only knows you have a ssd by the random performance it sees.

Raid-0 has been over hyped as a performance enhancer.
Sequential benchmarks do look wonderful, but the real world does not seem to deliver the indicated performance benefits for most
desktop users. The reason is, that sequential benchmarks are coded for maximum overlapped I/O rates.
It depends on reading a stripe of data simultaneously from each raid-0 member, and that is rarely what we do.
The OS does mostly small random reads and writes, so raid-0 is of little use there.
There are some apps that will benefit. They are characterized by reading large files in a sequential overlapped manner.

It is not clear to me why windows does not designate the raid-0 drive as a ssd.
I think I would bypass the issue by abandoning raid-0 for those drives.
m
0
l
January 13, 2014 12:45:54 PM

Hi,

Thanks for the reply. All are on RAID, SATA 6Gbps ports...on the Intel controller.

The C: and D: (SDD and HDD) are RAID 1. They are properly seen as SSD and HDD.

The third array is RAID 0 of SSD. And yes, the benchmark is higher for write performance...but the OS still thinks this third array is HDD, no matter how many times I run WEI on it, One would think there'd be a user-settable way of saying "I'm a SDD" in case the OS couldn't auto-detect it. Or one would expect the faster, SSD array, which actually works for trim tests, to be detected as SSD and the system RAID 1 detected as not-SSD...but that's not what it's doing.

Cheers,

Larry

geofelt said:
Are allRaid-0 is onl the devices on the Intel 6gb sata ports?

Windows only knows you have a ssd by the random performance it sees.

Raid-0 has been over hyped as a performance enhancer.
Sequential benchmarks do look wonderful, but the real world does not seem to deliver the indicated performance benefits for most
desktop users. The reason is, that sequential benchmarks are coded for maximum overlapped I/O rates.
It depends on reading a stripe of data simultaneously from each raid-0 member, and that is rarely what we do.
The OS does mostly small random reads and writes, so raid-0 is of little use there.
There are some apps that will benefit. They are characterized by reading large files in a sequential overlapped manner.

It is not clear to me why windows does not designate the raid-0 drive as a ssd.
I think I would bypass the issue by abandoning raid-0 for those drives.


m
0
l
Related resources
!