Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Optimal setup help - 2 ssd and 3 HDD

Last response: in Storage
Share
October 23, 2011 6:25:23 AM

I am a total newby building my first system.

I have already installed on a z68 board, the following:

120 GB SSD
60 GB SSD
1 TB HDD
2 older 1 TB HDD

I set it up initially with the OS on the 120 GB SSD, using the other SSD for programs / raid, and the 1 TBD for media. The older 2 1 TB HDD I was thinking of setting up for backup in raid 1. Of course now that everything is installed, I thought this might be optimal. I can't enable intel SRT without creating a new RAID and I think reinstalling windows. Does anyone have any thoughts about the best configuration, ideally without reinstalling windows and reformatting drives (is there software to do this?) Is it worth using the Intel SRT?

I really appreciate anyone's help.

More about : optimal setup ssd hdd

October 25, 2011 2:16:41 AM

You can configure the two older HDD's for RAID 1 without even touching the 120 GB SSD. I use Intel RST on my PC for two 500 GB's WD Black's, i get about 220 mb/s read (remember these are HDD's, not SSD's). However, I noticed that when using Intel RST for any stripe RAID, it uses about 300 MB's of RAM for caching.
m
0
l
October 25, 2011 5:05:48 PM

nemesis4895 said:
You can configure the two older HDD's for RAID 1 without even touching the 120 GB SSD. I use Intel RST on my PC for two 500 GB's WD Black's, i get about 220 mb/s read (remember these are HDD's, not SSD's). However, I noticed that when using Intel RST for any stripe RAID, it uses about 300 MB's of RAM for caching.


Thanks I will try. Would you suggest using RST for it? I will primarily use these drives for backup, or should I enable RST for my newer 1 TB drive?
m
0
l
Related resources
October 26, 2011 5:18:18 PM

I would suggest yes if you have 6 GB more of RAM, and I say that because there's hardly a point where I use less than 4 GB on everyday things.
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
October 26, 2011 5:47:05 PM

(1) skip RST.
..(A) RST for a pair of HDDs in raid1 used for Back-up would be a poor use of your 60 Gig SSD. Better reason - NO performance gain that you would see.
..(B) Used with a single Data drive, This depends a WHOLE lot on Usage. RST will increase HDD overall performance of a HDD from 1.5 to 4x. This is highly dependent on the algothium that stores data in cache. Remember on that data stored in cache is speed up, all other data is at the speed of the HDD. Therefore the statement of individual usage, ie how repedative is the request for data.

.. I have a Z68 MB - 2 intel Sata III ports with 2 120 gig sata III SSDs, 4 Intel sata II ports ( currently 1 Blu-ray writer and 1 1TB HDD). plus two unused Mavel Sata III ports.
.. Do not use the marvel sata III ports for a Sata III SSD.
.. My two SSDs are configured as 1 for OS + Programs, the 2nd on as a data/scratch disk. I think I'm better as disk as to what data I want to speed up.

On back-up. Raid1 will protect against a single drive failure, BUT there other failure modes that it DOES NOT protect against. A much better idea would be to use one of the drives as a single Back-up drive. The other I would remove and put in a USB3 enclosure and also use as a independent Back-up. That is what I do.

PS: For your windows 7. Use Windows 7 to create a image of your "System" drive. and select your Internal back-up drive for the location to store image. When done COPY to the USB3 drive. For restore the internal is faster, but if you lose that drive it is also then on the external drive.
Edit, added
When completing the image of your "C" drive, you will be prompted to create a restore disk. You can skip this and just use your window 7 installation disk to restoe image.
No more re-install and reinstall programs. Restoring from the image file will recreate your C drive to exactly the way it was when the image was created. You do NOT need to "Back-up" your C drive. Just redo the image file periodically.
m
0
l
October 26, 2011 8:06:23 PM

Awesome! Thanks fot the tips.

So you didn't use RST between your HDD and SSD because mose of you programs and OS are on the SSD? Better overall performance?
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
October 26, 2011 8:21:16 PM

Correct.
In Fact I have 3 systems, all with dual SSDs. The two desktops both have a SSD for OS + program and one for My most often used data (could be used as a overflow drive for least used programs). The 3rd one is a laptop - only 2 HDD bays. So it is configured the same, for least used data I use aq couple of larg USB3 thumdrives (32 and 64 Gig) and a USB3 1 TB drive.

Not a lover of SRT^, I feel it is only a viable option when a larger SSD is to expensive and the pearson can only afford a 40 gig SSD. Once you use a SSD for your boot/program drive, the SRT is not the better option. With an SSD boot drive, if I wanted faster data retrival, I'd go with a pair of HDDs in Raid0 conf.
m
0
l

Best solution

October 26, 2011 10:47:56 PM

RetiredChief said:
(1) skip RST.
..(A) RST for a pair of HDDs in raid1 used for Back-up would be a poor use of your 60 Gig SSD. Better reason - NO performance gain that you would see.
..(B) Used with a single Data drive, This depends a WHOLE lot on Usage. RST will increase HDD overall performance of a HDD from 1.5 to 4x. This is highly dependent on the algothium that stores data in cache. Remember on that data stored in cache is speed up, all other data is at the speed of the HDD. Therefore the statement of individual usage, ie how repedative is the request for data.

.. I have a Z68 MB - 2 intel Sata III ports with 2 120 gig sata III SSDs, 4 Intel sata II ports ( currently 1 Blu-ray writer and 1 1TB HDD). plus two unused Mavel Sata III ports.
.. Do not use the marvel sata III ports for a Sata III SSD.
.. My two SSDs are configured as 1 for OS + Programs, the 2nd on as a data/scratch disk. I think I'm better as disk as to what data I want to speed up.

On back-up. Raid1 will protect against a single drive failure, BUT there other failure modes that it DOES NOT protect against. A much better idea would be to use one of the drives as a single Back-up drive. The other I would remove and put in a USB3 enclosure and also use as a independent Back-up. That is what I do.

PS: For your windows 7. Use Windows 7 to create a image of your "System" drive. and select your Internal back-up drive for the location to store image. When done COPY to the USB3 drive. For restore the internal is faster, but if you lose that drive it is also then on the external drive.
Edit, added
When completing the image of your "C" drive, you will be prompted to create a restore disk. You can skip this and just use your window 7 installation disk to restoe image.
No more re-install and reinstall programs. Restoring from the image file will recreate your C drive to exactly the way it was when the image was created. You do NOT need to "Back-up" your C drive. Just redo the image file periodically.


I guess I had the wrong idea on what Intel RST actually was. Cleared that up for me as well, thanks!
Share
a c 353 G Storage
October 27, 2011 2:17:27 AM

My Bad RST should have been SRT: Went back and corredcted my post.

RST = Rapid Storage Technology, which is a driver for intel chipset.
And should be used when intel Chipset is used with a Hard drive (SSD and HDDs)
m
0
l
November 2, 2011 4:20:15 PM

RetiredChief said:
(1) skip RST.
..(A) RST for a pair of HDDs in raid1 used for Back-up would be a poor use of your 60 Gig SSD. Better reason - NO performance gain that you would see.

CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo

Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 374.525 MB/s

Sequential Write : 114.383 MB/s

Random Read 512KB : 351.614 MB/s

Random Write 512KB : 114.315 MB/s

Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 17.912 MB/s [ 4373.0 IOPS]

Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 53.859 MB/s [ 13149.2 IOPS]

Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 81.831 MB/s [ 19978.2 IOPS]

Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 105.460 MB/s [ 25747.0 IOPS]

Test : 4000 MB [C: 75.0% (349.4/465.7 GB)] (x5)

Date : 2011/11/01 12:17:04

OS : Windows 7 Home Premium Edition SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)

on my first run! remember, this was also done at 4000 mb! also, ATTO: highest read:472669- write:435974! I will get better #s with a faster hard drive! It is like having a mid-range 500gb ssd for $300.00! I have been using SRT since the z68 dropped, loving it, used a intel X25-V first, i could feel the faster program load/boot times, changed to the Mushkin, this set up is twice as fast as the intel 311 is on it's own!
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
November 2, 2011 5:25:24 PM

1) Not impressed with crystaldiskmark performance.
(2) In a previous post you indicated that it was like having a 300 Gig SSD - No way would your performance = a 300 Gig SSD.
.. Previous reviews of SRT have indicated a performance boost of from 2x to 4 x HDD on its own. That is NO WHERES near the 20x -> 40x that a large SSD provides. The reviews I've read have all indicated that if the SSD was large enough for OS + Programs that was the way to go, not SRT.
(3) With SRT:
... A) You lose TRIM
... B) Results (REAL LIFE) will vary considerably between users. If work done is very repetitive, will see good results, if Not results, not so good. What is not in cache is done at the speed of the HDD, in fact a little slower as request first looks in cache and if not there then to the HDD.
... C) SRT has not been out long enough to verify reliability using MLC SSD (vs SLC). The recommended fill for an SSD is 90%. When used for SRT fill is 100%

I stand by these comments.
m
0
l
November 2, 2011 5:41:01 PM

RetiredChief said:
1) Not impressed with crystaldiskmark performance.
(2) In a previous post you indicated that it was like having a 300 Gig SSD - No way would your performance = a 300 Gig SSD.
.. Previous reviews of SRT have indicated a performance boost of from 2x to 4 x HDD on its own. That is NO WHERES near the 20x -> 40x that a large SSD provides. The reviews I've read have all indicated that if the SSD was large enough for OS + Programs that was the way to go, not SRT.
(3) With SRT:
... A) You lose TRIM
... B) Results (REAL LIFE) will vary considerably between users. If work done is very repetitive, will see good results, if Not results, not so good. What is not in cache is done at the speed of the HDD, in fact a little slower as request first looks in cache and if not there then to the HDD.
... C) SRT has not been out long enough to verify reliability using MLC SSD (vs SLC). The recommended fill for an SSD is 90%. When used for SRT fill is 100%

I stand by these comments.

I hear you, and i stand by mine, and i actually USE srt, benched my self, and i said "mid-ranged ssd", if you don't agree, fine, but don't just go by what you heard, if that was the case, i would have a Bulldozer by now, not a i7 2600k, i scored 409 with AS SDD, good enough for me, Peace! [my bad, it scored 419 on AS SSD]
m
0
l
November 12, 2011 11:06:17 AM

Best answer selected by coocoo bananas.
m
0
l
!