4 x 120gb ssd sata 6Gb/s RAID 0 - Recommended Controller?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
U

UpGrade01

Distinguished
Feb 5, 2014
34
0
18,530
Hey guys,

I have been looking for a raid controller to do a 4 x ssd raid 0 array. My motherboard is the sabertooth z77 which has 4 x sata 6Gb/s ports but 2 of the ports are on separate controllers. So, the only way for me to get around this is to get a RAID controller. I have been looking at the Adaptec 6405E and the 6805E. The PCIe x4 on the 6805E is appealing due to having more through-put but I don't need the 8 channel support where as the 6405E is 4 channel but is only a PCIe x1. My price range on a card is around 250ish. Any advise would be great thank you. The SSDs I would be going with is listed below.

Kingston HyperX 3K SH103S3/120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC
 
Solution
ingtar33
i'm gonna be frank with you.

you'll not notice the difference from 1 ssd vs 4 in RAID 0. Furthermore, RAID0 fails at the square of the number of drives times the failure rate of one drive. So lets say 1 drive wil fail in 1 year 0.2% of the time. 2 in RAID0 will fail in 0.8% of the time in one year. 3 in RAID0 will fail 1.8% of the time, and 4 will fail in 3.2% of the time in 1 year. Which if you do the math is 16 times the rate 1 will fail.

RAID0 isn't really the most reliable setup with more then 2 drives. That's why there are other types of RAID. Throw in the fact you won't really notice any end user use improvements and you've got a questionable plan in your head.

That said... any INTEL raid controller will work...
Sort by date Sort by votes
ingtar33

ingtar33

Glorious
Dec 17, 2012
9,015
188
45,840
i'm gonna be frank with you.

you'll not notice the difference from 1 ssd vs 4 in RAID 0. Furthermore, RAID0 fails at the square of the number of drives times the failure rate of one drive. So lets say 1 drive wil fail in 1 year 0.2% of the time. 2 in RAID0 will fail in 0.8% of the time in one year. 3 in RAID0 will fail 1.8% of the time, and 4 will fail in 3.2% of the time in 1 year. Which if you do the math is 16 times the rate 1 will fail.

RAID0 isn't really the most reliable setup with more then 2 drives. That's why there are other types of RAID. Throw in the fact you won't really notice any end user use improvements and you've got a questionable plan in your head.

That said... any INTEL raid controller will work flawlessly with your plan.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
snakebitex

snakebitex

Distinguished
Feb 23, 2012
97
0
18,660
If you have the cash for the 8 channel go for it . RAID controller is investment in my opinion . So if you can get the one you really need buy it . Hands down. My 2c . I will not say about RAID 0 -1 , 0+1 , but performance wise is not that much. But for safe keeping your data is a good think.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ingtar33

ingtar33

Glorious
Dec 17, 2012
9,015
188
45,840


yeah... i had a RAID 10 idea in my head when i was reading the original post as well.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

TyrOd

Honorable
Aug 16, 2013
527
0
11,160


I know that you were just throwing out hypothetical numbers, but the real world failure rates are at least 10 times higher than in your examples.

You should never store important data on a RAID0 array of any kind especially if you don't have at least 2 other copies as a backup.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom