Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SAS 15k vs SSD

Last response: in Storage
March 7, 2010 4:43:29 AM

I want to add a RAID 0 boot partition to run windows and apps and i want it the fastest that money can buy...

So do i get 2 x SAS 15k drives and a nice Adaptec Hardware RAID controller, or do i get a couple of SSD drives and a nice Adaptec controller?

More about : sas 15k ssd

March 7, 2010 5:52:28 AM

I second this, but I am more interested in SSD vs Raid 0 SAS 15K.
Experts? what do you say? Which is better for overall performance? Which is a better and faster gaming config?
March 7, 2010 6:26:20 AM

In case it matters i will not be using my system for gaming, mainly for Photoshop/Lightroom working on images between 15-60mb each.

I do play games but do not care if the performance of them suffers to get a generally faster OS and Photoshop.
Related resources
a c 415 G Storage
March 7, 2010 7:12:26 AM

SSDs will be better than 15K SAS drives, RAID or not, for booting the system and starting applications because nothing beats their incredibly fast access times.

But the 15K drives might be faster at saving large images from Photoshop or lightroom because of their high write transfer rates.
a c 180 G Storage
March 7, 2010 4:59:09 PM

Sorry, 15k drives are optimized for server use. That means high iops in a heavily queued environment. In a desktop environment They do no better than a good conventional drive. The seek times are better because of the 15k rotation, but the data transfer times are not proportionally higher. I tried a 15k drive some time ago, and was disappointed.

Raid-0 will not help either. Raid-0 improves sequential throughput with large sequential files. That is not much help for the OS which primarily does lots of small reads and writes.

For the OS, nothing beats a good SSD. Take the money you would spend on a hardware raid card and spend it on a good SSD.

For photoshop , get as much ram as you can. The I/O you don't do by using ram is vastly faster.