Samsung SSD 850 EVO - RAPID-mode or RAID0?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

tomgri

Reputable
Jul 25, 2015
6
0
4,510
Hi

I've bought two 500GB Samsung 850 EVO.

The question is, as written in the headline: What would give the best speed?
If i use them seperatly with the RAPID-mode? (May then return one of them)
Or use them in RAID0?


Thanks
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Cem Goker

Cem Goker

Distinguished
Jul 3, 2013
290
22
19,015
The RAPID mode, according to my research and self-experience (since I own the 120 GB version) actually slows up the booting by about a second or two more. And it doesn't add any improvements as far as I can see. Just use your SSD on RAID0 and have AHCI enabled on it. And also, look at these:
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1837608/840-evo-rapid-mode.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2510840/installing-850-evo-rapid-mode-question.html

 
Upvote 1 Downvote
USAFRet

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
171,315
17,829
184,590


1. You can only use RAPID mode with one of them
2. You don't want to RAID 0 those. Give no real performance benefit.

No harm in having the two drives. 1 for OS and applications, the other for your personal data, games, whatever.
Actually, I much prefer a distinct drive for the OS, etc. Other stuff lives elsewhere.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mcnumpty23

mcnumpty23

Polypheme
Jul 15, 2011
15,519
0
66,960


surely 2 x 500gb in raid0 =1000gb

2 x 500gb in raid 1 =500gb

or is my brain not functioning properly due to its saturday morning?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
USAFRet

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
171,315
17,829
184,590


You are correct, if we were talking about RAID 0 vs RAID 1.

2 x 500GB + RAID 0 = 1TB
2 x 500GB without RAID 0 = 1TB
2 x 500GB + RAID 1 = 500GB
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mcnumpty23

mcnumpty23

Polypheme
Jul 15, 2011
15,519
0
66,960


yeah sorry i should have been clearer as i said its saturday :)

raid 0 would give 1 C drive of 1tb as opposed to 2 separate drives of 500gb with no raid

so still 1tb either way just raid0 would double the capacity of C


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

tomgri

Reputable
Jul 25, 2015
6
0
4,510
I tested the different configurations in the AS SSD Benchmark:

And if you just look at the numbers its looks quite remarable better with just the RAPID-mode.
I have not been able to install OS yet, because i don't have it right here with me. But when trying to copy flder and files over from one of the SSD t the other, and to another SSD (Intel), i dont see much difference. (may be a total wrong thing to do though :p )

Here are some pic from the Benchmarks:

The Intel SSD ( C: ): https://flic.kr/p/vvX7YM

Samsung SSD - Straight out of the box: https://flic.kr/p/wqvgFd

Samsung SSD - RAID 0: https://flic.kr/p/wbdb5W

Samsung SSD - RAPID Mode: https://flic.kr/p/wbjWQ4

Samsung SSD - RAPID Mode - RAID 0: https://flic.kr/p/wbjNwk
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

tomgri

Reputable
Jul 25, 2015
6
0
4,510



So it comes down to that i can just use it as it is out of the box. Since the RAPID system use some CPU and RAM.
And in real life the RAPID is faster in some ways but also slower in other?

My mainly reason for the upgrade is speed when editing photos in Lighroom. I Have a Nikon D800 wichs puts the raw files up to 40MB each.

I have two 2TB 3.5 drives that i use for storage of files I dont use often.
So i was buying the two 500GB SSD in the sole purpose of getting more workflow speed in Lightroom.
But then i can just use one of them. And perhaps retur the other one.

Do you have an opinion about the RAPID mode would benefit the workflow speed in Lightroom?

Thanks so far for all the response.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
USAFRet

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
171,315
17,829
184,590
I use Lightroom heavily as well. My Fuji doesn't make RAW files as large as yours, but still large.

Probably won't see any real performance difference with the RAPID.
With the RAPID, you're sucking up some RAM to cache stuff for the SSD. Said RAM would be better used as actual RAM.

For a while, I ran a dedicated RAMDisk, specifically for Lightroom cache space. No noticeable performance difference over just using the SSD as it is.

Personally, I would keep both drives.
1 for OS and applications, the other for Lightroom working files. Other drives for other stuff. That's what I do anyway.

A 250GB Samsung, specifically as the image manipulation drive. Only when something is actually 'finished' does it go to one of the HDD's.
Benchmarks are great, if you are chasing numbers for bragging rights. I prefer actual real world performance.
"How long does it take to do operation X, with or without the RAPID or RAID?"

If doing all that RAID or RAPID gives me no noticeable performance benefit in actual use, then it is of no use to me.
Extra complexity for no benefit.

As always, YMMV.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
T

tomgri

Reputable
Jul 25, 2015
6
0
4,510




Thank you very much for the detailed answer :D Appreciates it

I do have another question, when i copy my whole Lightroom folder with pictures, catalog etc from my external HDD via USB 3.0 it startet at really high MB/s, then goes slowly down to about 110 MB/s, but about 1/3 in it drops to about 65 MB/s..

The question is, why?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
USAFRet

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
171,315
17,829
184,590


Yeah, they do that. An initial burst of speed, then slows down to a constant speed. That 'burst' is what the manufacturer lists on their spec sheet.
USB (and network) traffic depends on a lot of back and forth communication. Once the buffer of whatever fills up, things get a bit slower.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

Anuj_Falcon

Commendable
Oct 21, 2016
5
0
1,510
They clearly mentioned that it uses algorithms to select data that is used very often. Using only 1gb of RAM means read / write speed will go low once it hits the limit of 1 gb leaving some room for prefilled data selected by Samsung algorithm. They mention that RAM is used as cache rather than as storage.

In my case, I don't feel I am benefitted much because I edit videos where video loading time is bothering me rather the actual software only open time. The video files changes constantly as I get new ones to work with. So I don't think Samsung algorithm will know which video I am gonna choose and use till when, unless I open the same thing every time like opening the same video software in my case (or same game for some days). SO my best guess is a part of my video software will be in the RAM but not the actual video files.

It makes absolute sense to me that unless I store all the data in RAM, I can't expect faster I/O in everything. I keep requesting my CPU to read different data most of the time. BUT Samsung algorithm stores usually, regularly used data to RAM.

Coming to the writing speed, it may be of some use in short data copy (may be of use in data collection during science experiments) as the RAM is gonna overflow with data slowly though the data get's written to the ssd later. Because incoming speed exceeds (to RAM) the out going speed (to SSD).

The way the benchmarking is done, I think it writes data and tries to read the same written data and we don't interrupt in between with some other data to overflow the cache. So benchmarking data goes to RAM (then goes to SSD) and gets read from the RAM because it's still there in cache (as no new data is poured in still) and Samsung algorithm makes some work here.

In my real situation, large file copying (write) and constantly changing read data (read) doesn't make much use of RAPID. It's all a matter of probability and higher the cache data, higher the chances that needed data is there and high space for writing.
 
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