Use AS SSD for a SSD benchmark, Uses compressed data, not uncompressed data for benchmarks.
For a OS + Program drives Sequencial read write performance is the Least importan matrix, what is important is access speed and 4k random reads/writes. However Raid00 does very little to improve thes two parameters.
Screen shot of My M4 (With Firmware 0009) using AS SSD.
Burst rate is for how fast the cache is in a HDD - Opps, no cache in a SSD, unless you count what windows does in the background. Bottom line ignor burst rate for an SSD.
I am almost 100% positive windows booted faster with the one SSD. I used to barely see the windows logo start, but now I see the whole startup logo. My restart time is 53 seconds!
I've read so many mixed reviews about putting SSDs in RAID. I am thinking of just seporating the drives and making 1 for boot / web browsers / microsoft office, and the other for games. While a third 1tb drive for storage and other programs.
Suggestions? If I can be getting a faster system with them in RAID0, I would keep it. But I'm not seeing it.
The scores are very good, Problem is that benchmarks can be a little decieving when compared to user real life performance.
As I indicated the most important parameter is the 4 K read/writes, which are not improved by raid0.
The only real problem with Raid0 is the loss of trim support and therefore have to rely on Garbage Collection. Without trim you may experience periodic slow downs depending on how effective the CG is and when it runs. Marvel based tend to only run when system is idle. Some users have reported that they had to leave system on, but logged off overnight to restore performance. I think the SF2281 has a more active CG that runs in the Background, However when running and depending on what is being done at that time, user may experience a slow down.
Raid0 for SSDs is OK for a data drive working with large file types (High sequencial performance). Just not much performance boost for a OS/Program drive.