Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Multi-size SSD in RAID 0

Tags:
  • SSD
  • Storage
  • NAS / RAID
Last response: in Storage
Share
October 13, 2014 5:05:53 PM

Hey, guys!

All right, I admit it. I'm a bit spoiled.

I've got a 256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD, and its plainly running out of space. I install ALL programs (other than the ones that I installed in the first couple of months) into a 2TB HDD in my system. However, I would like to know something: Could I take a different 250GB SSD and have it run in RAID 0 with my 256GB SSD? I could partition them to be the same size, etc., but would it work?

I am not worried about deleting files, I can clone it to one of three other drives I have accessible, so that's not an issue. All I want to know if it will work.

Thanks!

More about : multi size ssd raid

a c 100 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:09:24 PM

Me thinks you need the exact same model SSDs and the exact same size too.
m
0
l
a c 125 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:10:11 PM

Been there done that with 2 identical Samsing 256 GB 840 pros.... what a PITA and no performance gain. .... broke the array .... call Samsung, they will advise against
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

a c 921 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:10:20 PM

RAID 0 + SSD. Not a good idea
RAID 0 + different size SSD. Worse idea.

Would it work? Yes, mostly.
But why do this?

Just install the second and use it as a second drive.
Share
October 13, 2014 5:17:36 PM

Ok, let's rephrase this. I'll set them up as RAID0 and then have both of them mirrored to another HDD I have which is around 1TB in size. Bad idea still?

Oh and also, is there any credibility to using 2x128 or 2x256GB SSDs in RAID 0 as a steam drive?

I'm crazy, I know...
m
0
l
a c 921 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:19:28 PM

space55 said:
Ok, let's rephrase this. I'll set them up as RAID0 and then have both of them mirrored to another HDD I have which is around 1TB in size. Bad idea still?


Yes, bad idea.
RAID 0 + SSD brings no benefit, and brings increased fail potential.
Mirroring that (RAID 1) to an HDD is far, far worse.
m
0
l
a c 921 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:20:21 PM

For a Steam install space, just have them as individual drives. No RAID needed.
m
0
l
a c 125 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:24:20 PM

RAID 0 and SSDs = bad idea no matter which way ya slice it....what's the point ? Performance degrades in RAID and the Samsung Utilities don't work in RAID.

I started off w/ 2 SSDs in RAID 0 and 2 SSHDs in RAID 1 .... now I have two separate SSDs, can boot from eitehr one if one goes south and I mirrored the two SSHDs using free backup software ... runs once a day takes about 21 seconds

RAID on the desktop has never been a good idea except in very rare instances.... here's a rather ancient post on the subject.


Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID_0#RAID_0

RAID 0 is useful for setups such as large read-only NFS servers where mounting many disks is time-consuming or impossible and redundancy is irrelevant.

RAID 0 is also used in some gaming systems where performance is desired and data integrity is not very important. However, real-world tests with games have shown that RAID-0 performance gains are minimal, although some desktop applications will benefit.[1][2]


http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2101
"We were hoping to see some sort of performance increase in the game loading tests, but the RAID array didn't give us that. While the scores put the RAID-0 array slightly slower than the single drive Raptor II, you should also remember that these scores are timed by hand and thus, we're dealing within normal variations in the "benchmark".

Our Unreal Tournament 2004 test uses the full version of the game and leaves all settings on defaults. After launching the game, we select Instant Action from the menu, choose Assault mode and select the Robot Factory level. The stop watch timer is started right after the Play button is clicked, and stopped when the loading screen disappears. The test is repeated three times with the final score reported being an average of the three. In order to avoid the effects of caching, we reboot between runs. All times are reported in seconds; lower scores, obviously, being better. In Unreal Tournament, we're left with exactly no performance improvement, thanks to RAID-0

If you haven't gotten the hint by now, we'll spell it out for you: there is no place, and no need for a RAID-0 array on a desktop computer. The real world performance increases are negligible at best and the reduction in reliability, thanks to a halving of the mean time between failure, makes RAID-0 far from worth it on the desktop.

Bottom line: RAID-0 arrays will win you just about any benchmark, but they'll deliver virtually nothing more than that for real world desktop performance. That's just the cold hard truth."


http://www.techwarelabs.com/articles/hardware/raid-and-...
".....we did not see an increase in FPS through its use. Load times for levels and games was significantly reduced utilizing the Raid controller and array. As we stated we do not expect that the majority of gamers are willing to purchase greater than 4 drives and a controller for this kind of setup. While onboard Raid is an option available to many users you should be aware that using onboard Raid will mean the consumption of CPU time for this task and thus a reduction in performance that may actually lead to worse FPS. An add-on controller will always be the best option until they integrate discreet Raid controllers with their own memory into consumer level motherboards."

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1001325
"However, many have tried to justify/overlook those shortcomings by simply saying "It's faster." Anyone who does this is wrong, wasting their money, and buying into hype. Nothing more."

http://jeff-sue.suite101.com/how-raid-storage-improves-...
"The real-world performance benefits possible in a single-user PC situation is not a given for most people, because the benefits rely on multiple independent, simultaneous requests. One person running most desktop applications may not see a big payback in performance because they are not written to do asynchronous I/O to disks. Understanding this can help avoid disappointment."

http://www.scs-myung.com/v2/index. [...] om_content
"What about performance? This, we suspect, is the primary reason why so many users doggedly pursue the RAID 0 "holy grail." This inevitably leads to dissapointment by those that notice little or no performance gain.....As stated above, first person shooters rarely benefit from RAID 0.__ Frame rates will almost certainly not improve, as they are determined by your video card and processor above all else. In fact, theoretically your FPS frame rate may decrease, since many low-cost RAID controllers (anything made by Highpoint at the tiem of this writing, and most cards from Promise) implement RAID in software, so the process of splitting and combining data across your drives is done by your CPU, which could better be utilized by your game. That said, the CPU overhead of RAID0 is minimal on high-performance processors."

Even the HD manufacturers limit RAID's advantages to very specific applications and non of them involves gaming:

http://westerndigital.com/en/products/raid/http://weste...


Nothing has changed in last 10 years
m
0
l
October 13, 2014 5:26:37 PM

Let's try this again. Getting a new 512GB SSD for my OS, cloning my current one, then wiping my current one and using it as a Steam drive. Then getting another two 256GB SSDs and running them in RAID 0 for recording high bitrate videos to.

I know I'm pushing it. I'm just plainly curious.
m
0
l
a c 921 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:34:43 PM

space55 said:
Let's try this again. Getting a new 512GB SSD for my OS, cloning my current one, then wiping my current one and using it as a Steam drive. Then getting another two 256GB SSDs and running them in RAID 0 for recording high bitrate videos to.

I know I'm pushing it. I'm just plainly curious.


Will it work? Probably.
Will it work just as well (or possibly better) with 2 discreet drives? Yes.
Would a second 512 work better than 2 x 256 RAID 0 drives? Yes.
m
0
l
a c 125 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:38:03 PM

Same answer. SSD's perform worse in RAID 0. If ya don't believe us , ask Samsung.
m
0
l
October 13, 2014 5:41:51 PM

Now I have an even trickier issue: picking the best answer...
m
0
l
a c 125 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:43:01 PM

Pick USAF :)  ... his avatar is cuter !
m
0
l
October 13, 2014 5:45:09 PM

JackNaylorPE said:
Pick USAF :)  ... his avatar is cuter !


Has humor too!

Plus, I liked Chicken Run. So there's that.
m
0
l
a c 921 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:46:53 PM

JackNaylorPE said:
Pick USAF :)  ... his avatar is cuter !


But yours is more seasonal !
m
0
l
a c 921 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:47:14 PM

space55 said:
JackNaylorPE said:
Pick USAF :)  ... his avatar is cuter !


Has humor too!

Plus, I liked Chicken Run. So there's that.


Not from Chicken Run.
m
0
l
a c 125 G Storage
October 13, 2014 5:52:12 PM

USAFRet said:
JackNaylorPE said:
Pick USAF :)  ... his avatar is cuter !


But yours is more seasonal !


Deadheads aren't seasonal .... we're just ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYETHsxAv8c

at least that's what my wife says

m
0
l
!