To Raid, or not to Raid.

Arigo

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2009
155
0
18,680
I was wondering what would be the right path to take ....

Some info:

I am formatting my PC, and I have three SSDs. I have two OCV Vertex II's, that are in Raid 0 (60gb each), and have been in Raid 0 for 5-6 years now (lol). They are pretty old, and pretty slow compared to some of the new SSDs on the market. (285mpbs read, 275 mbps write)

My third SSD is an Intel 850 Evo (120gb), which I got a few months back, and I have been using as my main drive, meanwhile I have not even been touching the old OCZ SSDS, they have been sitting there gathering dust.

My question is as follows: Would it make sense to have all three of these SSDS in raid 0? I am unsure if it is wise to run these two very old SSDS, with the fast new one, and if it will affect the speeds of the new drive.

Or should I just have my main partition on the 850 Evo like I currently have, and use the old SSDS as extra storage?

What do you guys think?
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator


The 60+60 is useless all by itself.
Adding the 120 doesn't help things.

SSD + RAID 0 does not scale the performance as it did with HDD's.
Sure, benchmarks may look awesome. But actual user performance...not so much.
 


RAID'ed drives should be of equal size, otherwise the lowest common capacity is used as the basis. In this case you'd get 60x3=180, with the remaining half of the 120 GB drive unused.
 
I asked myself "To Raid or not to Raid" ?
Was it for Security or Speed and which Array to choose. Raid 0 has no security and if one disk spits the dummy then you loose both drives. When I bothered setting up a RAID I realized it was (for me) a security thing so I got a WD Passport and a weekly routine. I have pretty fast SSD performance wise so was never my concern, so I concluded: Raid SUCKs for me and I don't need it. Do YOU need it.?
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
With performance differences with SSDs and raid, if you already have 2x 60s set for C, I'd just go ahead and set the 120 as D and call it a day. As said, they don't scale, and as fast as SSDs are, the 1 second or less savings isn't something to be honestly worth considering. The biggest downside to the raid is you can't then take out a drive if it goes bunk, you lost everything as data is shared, not mirrored.
 
I'm just going to throw this out there. Since there are no real benefits to SSDs in RAID, I would join all three to a dynamic volume. This way you would have 1 240GB drive. Performance will likely be a mixed bag but nothing I bet you'd see in real world performance.
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator


Aside from having a single drive letter, what benefit would this dynamic volume bring?
I see it as just a maintenance nightmare.
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator


If one drive died, or the RAID controller died, or if you wanted to repurpose one of the drives to somewhere else.

I have 5 drives in my system. Generally designated for different things.
Application A always saves to Drive 2. Application B always saves to Drive 3, etc...
 
1. Dynamic volumes can be done via windows software. No need to worry about RAID controller. Also he would have the same problems with a RAID 0 if a drive died and or he wanted to repurpose the drives.

2. In your case you prolly have much larger drives then 2 60GB and 1 120GB SSD. While the OP certainly could do as you do, keep in mind some modern games are already pushing 40GB in size.