Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Toms Needs Small Raid0 to Large Single SSD Benchmark Comparisons

  • SSD
  • Benchmark
  • NAS / RAID
  • Storage
Last response: in Storage
October 26, 2011 4:09:17 PM

TOM: Can you please create a Small drive Raid-0 to Large Single SSD benchmark comparison? I think this is something that is needed very much and I believe many people are missing out on a very important aspect of SSD sizes and prices. Everyone has single SSD benchmarks and then some Raid-0 Benchmarks but no one is doing direct comparisons with the same amount of space. This is my current dillemma with my purchase planning, I think you will discover you get a much better price/performance ratio with two smaller drives compared to a larger single drive. The larger drives perform better but not twice as fast so i would think raid-0 would win out?

Looking at some basic prices on you see this:

Corsair Force Series 3 CSSD-F120GB3A-BK 2.5" 120GB $179.99 X 2 = $360.00
Corsair Force Series 3 CSSD-F240GB3-BK 2.5" 240GB $329.99

Crucial M4 CT128M4SSD2 2.5" 128GB $199.99 X 2 = $400.00
Crucial M4 CT256M4SSD2 2.5" 256GB $380.00

OCZ Vertex 3 VTX3-25SAT3-120G 2.5" 120GB $199.99 X 2 = $400.00
OCZ Vertex 3 VTX3-25SAT3-240G 2.5" 240GB $464.99

As you can see prices are very comparable, slightly higher or even lower in some cases depending on what sales you can find out there.


More about : toms small raid0 large single ssd benchmark comparisons

a c 187 G Storage
October 26, 2011 5:03:59 PM

I can give you an actual non scientific experience.

Early on, I bought an Intel X25-M 80gb drive. Installed it, and it went well.
When I ran out of room on my "C" drive, I bought a second 80gb drive and installed it in raid-0.
My primary objective was the simplicity of managing a single 160gb image.
Synthetic benchmarks looked wonderful, but I really could not tell any performance difference with normal desktop operations.

My son needed a pc, and I built him one using one of the 80gb drives, and sold the other.
I replaced the raid-0 setup with a single Intel X25-M 160gb drive. My perception was that the single drive was at least as quick, and perhaps quicker.
I think the ability to enable "trim" may have made the difference.

One problem with synthetic benchmarks is that they do not mirror what you and I actually do.
Most of what we do is small random reads and writes at low queue levels.
That kind of work depends mostly on response times, and all ssd's are very good at that.

Today, I would buy on price per gb, and on the reliability of the vendor.
Here is a report on return rates for ssd's:

Intel looks to be the best, and I have heard good things from Samsung.
They both produce their own nand chips. Perhaps that means something.
October 26, 2011 8:36:47 PM

Thanks, i don't feel i accuratly described the point of my request.

It isn't single versus raid0 straight up, it is the same companies series of drives in different sizes against each other.

instead of buying an intel 240GB, how fast is 2 intel 120's raid0 for the same price?

basically all ssd's straight up are faster the larger they get, but not THAT much, so it would seem the raid0 could possibly be superior for the same price.

that is what i would like to see determined in a price/performance graph. Even 4x128GB raid0 versus buying a single 512GB for the higher price.

actually in your 2nd link i found a comparison, of one brand to go by with some interesting results, but i would be awesome if toms could do a real review of several brands to see who scales better.

Related resources