Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I'm looking for two high performance SSD's to use in a RAID-0 config

Last response: in Storage
Share
January 2, 2013 7:04:50 AM

The SSD's i was thinking about are:

OCZ RevoDrive 120 GB - Price 1658 DKK - 293.30 USD
OCZ Vertex 4 - 128 GB x2 - Price 1758 DKK - 310.99 USD
OCZ Vector 128 GB x2 - Price 2054 DKK - 363.35 USD
Samsung 840 Pro 128 x2 GB - Price 2078 DKK - 367.60 USD
Prices in Denmark (The closest country and the cheapest Taxes)

Price performance vice would probably be the vertex 4's but i want your recommendations on if i should go over the sweet point - or more future prof. I'm upgrading from a WD 750 GB Black 64 MB cash, but i will keep it for just dumping games on.

or should i go with just 1 of the following?

I'v looked up on atleast 20 forums about each product, but i just cant decide what i should go with.

If you have any diffrent SSD drive you think fits better than tell me. I'm not planning on upgrading to a further improved drive until it get's up to 3gb/s seq R/W in a reasonably price, so i want some good drives which will preform good for a couple of years.

The only reason i dislike the RevoDrive is you cant put it in a notebook(yes i have a desktop pc) and when i go to school, it's nice to have a fast pc, cuz we are coming to use pc's a lot in the coming year. But i use my pc most for gaming, and the laptop has a decent drive(nothing compared to a SSD) but for School i think it's good enough.

Thanks for reading my post :)  and thanks for wasting your time on me xD
January 2, 2013 8:52:33 AM

it is not recommended to use SSD's in RAID0 Config , u won't notice any speed difference and u'll shorten ur drives lifespan.
use one for ur games and the other for OS .

PS : Get the Samsung 840
January 2, 2013 9:59:40 AM

ok thanks for the quick reply i thank for your knowledge but ill have to get some other replays just so i'm 100% sure :) 

But according to this post: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?2840...
it nearly hits double the seq read and it gains a bit in the random's and they are rated to be 1,5 million hours and thats like 171 years. so if running SSD's in RAID0 reduces the life spawn by 90% i will still be able to run it for 17 years.
Related resources
a b G Storage
January 2, 2013 10:16:03 AM

Putting SSDs into RAID is pointless. The best advice has been given, buy 1 drive to load the OS and programs you use the most, buy a mechanical drive for storage.
a b G Storage
January 2, 2013 10:34:09 AM

Ive had 2 SSD's in raid 0 in the past and all i can say is its really not worth it.
Sure the sequential speeds look impressive but in real world scenarios you really wont see any benifit.
Do what skywalker said and run 1 SSD for windows/programs/etc and the other for games.
January 2, 2013 10:34:53 AM

jitpublisher said:
Putting SSDs into RAID is pointless. The best advice has been given, buy 1 drive to load the OS and programs you use the most, buy a mechanical drive for storage.


can i get an detailed explanation on why it's pointless.
a b G Storage
January 2, 2013 10:41:48 AM

Nowadays, I think every PC should include an SSD period. They’re waaaaaaaaay faster and they draw less energy, but unfortunately they do cost a significant amount more than a traditional hard drive.

Those who have some extra budget laying around, I’d definitely suggest going with a 128GB Samsung 840 Pro or 256GB Samsung 840 Pro in combination with a 1TB Western Digital Caviar Black or 1TB Seagate Barracuda which ever is cheaper. This will allow for plenty of hard drive space for storage while OS and application files may be placed on the SSD for that extra top notch performance.
January 2, 2013 12:45:22 PM

lostmyclan said:
I make a raid 0 with vertex 4 and not improve anything. the speeds on programs is the basic same. and boot load time is higher than one.

if u don´t get the z77 our x79 chipset u don´t have the option for trim support.
u kill more faster yours ssd.

samsung 840 our vertex 4 for epic win.
vertex 4 uses highly amount of cpu power. More mhz more speed u get.


Copied:

JKatwyopc

Almost any motherboard can support an SSD drive if it has the correct interface for it, usually only a SATA interface is required. For TRIM support OS is the main concern. As far as the computer is concerned the SSD is nothing more than a very fast HDD.

One thing to consider is that if you want to take full advantage of all that smokin' performance on the Sandforce controllers you'll need to get one with a SATA 3 interface and SATA 3 capable cables.


Me

And also i don't think it will mater if it uses any thing of my cpu, avrage is prob about 20% Max settings but it doesn't go above 45-50% on highest settings in any game(i know its graphics depentant) only in benchmarks it hits 100%

I'm running a Intel Core i7 2600k clocked at 3.8 ghz(yes i'm a puzzy) and a ASUS p8z68-v pro and also as this other dude mentioned above it's os dependant, so it will not be a problem. Just have win 7 and it will work. probably also working on 8 but i'm not sure about that.
January 2, 2013 1:18:58 PM

RagnarKruse said:
can i get an detailed explanation on why it's pointless.


http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/ssd-raid-0-charts-...
vs.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/raid-scaling-charts-uk,re...

Good article to read.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/raid-scaling-charts-uk,re...

Personally if you really really needs the extra speed and have money to burn then go for it.
I think i read some where there can be issues with trash clean up on the drives, the trash clean up the the RAID controller does can conflict with the trash clean up on the drive, leading to slowdowns.
It will be worth reading some information about Enterprise SSD RAID. to see which application get the most benefit out of doing SSD RAID's.
A guild line that i would use is home much bandwidth do you have on the buses, and try and fully saturate the ones closest to your drives. eg. SATA3 6gb/s Controller on the RAID Controller - then the Controller need to be fast enough to handle this at MAX though put. (2 drives 12gb/s). i am not sure but after a couple of drives you may run into controller cache/CPU/PCI Express bus speed problems.
a b G Storage
January 2, 2013 1:21:04 PM

Negative. Z77-era chipset support TRIM for RAID SSDs, Z68 and prior does not.

You double your chance of having complete loss of data on the drives with very little practical gain.

As long as you have good backups and system image tho, it's your time.
January 2, 2013 1:47:40 PM



i dont know about you guys but these performances you get from raid seems quiet good. and somone mentioned than you will be at bigger risk at losing data... honestly i don't give a flying .... about losing data. As long i get top performance for good price its well done i looked up and the 256 gb samsung 840 pro is 321.25 USD and tow of the 128 gb is 367.60 and that equals 256 gb. so samg gigs and alot more performance at the cost of risk of losing data i think its really worth it.. but that's just me. and i have a decent budget and I would happily spend over 300 usd on a good hard drive lolz.
January 2, 2013 1:52:41 PM

davidgermain said:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/ssd-raid-0-charts-...
vs.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/raid-scaling-charts-uk,re...

Good article to read.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/raid-scaling-charts-uk,re...

Personally if you really really needs the extra speed and have money to burn then go for it.
I think i read some where there can be issues with trash clean up on the drives, the trash clean up the the RAID controller does can conflict with the trash clean up on the drive, leading to slowdowns.
It will be worth reading some information about Enterprise SSD RAID. to see which application get the most benefit out of doing SSD RAID's.
A guild line that i would use is home much bandwidth do you have on the buses, and try and fully saturate the ones closest to your drives. eg. SATA3 6gb/s Controller on the RAID Controller - then the Controller need to be fast enough to handle this at MAX though put. (2 drives 12gb/s). i am not sure but after a couple of drives you may run into controller cache/CPU/PCI Express bus speed problems.



good post only bad its from 2007. would like a update.. but thats what davidgermain came with.

quote.
davidgermain wrote :

Just found this -
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ssd- [...] 32151.html
January 2, 2013 2:15:23 PM

RagnarKruse said:
good post only bad its from 2007. would like a update.. but thats what davidgermain came with.

quote.
davidgermain wrote :

Just found this -
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ssd- [...] 32151.html


yeah there does not seem to be much info that it current on this topic on toms. but i found a site dedicated to all things SSD with many RAID articles.

http://thessdreview.com/
January 2, 2013 2:38:45 PM

Raid 0 will be fine is you want 2 x the read. write speed. 1 SSd is fast as hell though.

And like another poster mentioned you need to have the correct chipset to support raid 0 with SSD drives.
January 2, 2013 2:58:03 PM

i would stay away from a revo drive at least the 1st version revo drive 3 x2 are the ones you really want to get. revo drive 3 can be a pain but the performance is comparable to 2 ssd drives in raid 0 how ever they are also on the exspensive side

too bad ssd drives are so costly they make for great server drives.. personally i think you would do alright daisy chaining a few 64 GB drives and having a raid 0 for about the same price and you would have the same effect .. corsair m4 or maybe a patriot pyro drive
you would be looking at 2000 MB reads and writes ..
January 2, 2013 3:00:54 PM

daship said:
Raid 0 will be fine is you want 2 x the read. write speed. 1 SSd is fast as hell though.

And like another poster mentioned you need to have the correct chipset to support raid 0 with SSD drives.



the z77 does allow trim in raid 0 and z68 doesn't but the z68 supports trim single drive
a b G Storage
January 4, 2013 1:03:52 PM

RagnarKruse said:
can i get an detailed explanation on why it's pointless.


The numbers look impressive, alright. But look hard at those numbers, a single SSD is fast. RAID introduces a whole set of complications that I personally (I used RAID for years, until SSD's came onto the scene) prefer not to deal with anymore.

One of the things that makes an SSD so impressive is the latencies. Almost none, practically zero. This makes a difference you feel and see in everyday use. Everything you do is almost instant. The large sustained data read and write rates are not important for most things you do, most people do not need or benefit from those numbers at all. It's like taking a 2 lane road that travels 50 cars a day and making it an 8 lane road. Sure, its nice and wide open, but did it really help anything? Putting 2 into RAID will benchmark some very impressive numbers, but really, what are you going to be doing with your PC that will benefit from that much bandwidth?

However, if you have the money to spend, and think you need this type of bandwidth, then go for it.

I personally use 1 SSD for my OS, and few programs that I use a lot, things like my Antivirus are installed on it, and then I have a 1 gig WD Black that I install everything else on, save my data, and an external drive for backups. I will say that my PC is fast, very fast, and is a real pleasure to use.

January 4, 2013 4:33:20 PM

jitpublisher said:
The numbers look impressive, alright. But look hard at those numbers, a single SSD is fast. RAID introduces a whole set of complications that I personally (I used RAID for years, until SSD's came onto the scene) prefer not to deal with anymore.

One of the things that makes an SSD so impressive is the latencies. Almost none, practically zero. This makes a difference you feel and see in everyday use. Everything you do is almost instant. The large sustained data read and write rates are not important for most things you do, most people do not need or benefit from those numbers at all. It's like taking a 2 lane road that travels 50 cars a day and making it an 8 lane road. Sure, its nice and wide open, but did it really help anything? Putting 2 into RAID will benchmark some very impressive numbers, but really, what are you going to be doing with your PC that will benefit from that much bandwidth?

However, if you have the money to spend, and think you need this type of bandwidth, then go for it.

I personally use 1 SSD for my OS, and few programs that I use a lot, things like my Antivirus are installed on it, and then I have a 1 gig WD Black that I install everything else on, save my data, and an external drive for backups. I will say that my PC is fast, very fast, and is a real pleasure to use.



yes look you only dislike raid0 cuz losing of data right? since you use backups i guess so. i don't have any important data family pics etc. the only thing i have on is os and games. so i honestly don't give a flying .... about the whole data loss possibility.
!