SSD 4 x RAID 0 worth it or not?

[horseboy666]

Okay I have 2 WD Velociraptor 300 GB GLFS, but selling them off for $500 Canadian total and going to buy 4 Crucial CT64M225 M225 64 GB SATA 2 drives, and I am going to throw them onto a pci raid card and run them in RAID 0.

 

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=41633

 

They are each on sale for 165.51 Canadian if you are a premier partner, which i am.

 

when I had my Velociraptors in RAID 0, I was getting roughly 150 MB/s using HD TUNE (free version)

 

Using just 1, I would get roughly 100 MB/s a gain of 50%

 

 

Now I am to understand that SSD stack completely in RAID 0, example, the Crucial SSD I am buying, are rated at

 

200 MB/s read and 150 MB/s write, if I get 4 in RAID 0, it should be 800 MB/s Read and 600 MB/s Write (theoretically)

 

Now SATA 2 has a limit of 300 MB/s... does this mean that I will only see a maximum of 300 MB/s?? or is that PER Sata 2 port? meaning if I have 4, it would be 300 MB/s (limit) x 4 = 1,200 MB/s limit combined

 

So which is it, maximum 300 MB/s total, or is it PER port.

 

If the Max is 300 MB/s no matter what, then I will just get 2 128 GB SSD and be at the max.

 

Let me know, thanks in advance.

 

P.S. I searched for this before posting, couldnt find a real answer, so please dont tell me to google it or search.

[Waco]

The SATA 3 Gb/s rating is per port. Assuming you have a good RAID card you will get near-linear scaling in terms of both IOPs and bandwidth (read and write) in RAID 0 with SSDs.

 

I have a single Indilix drive in my desktop and it's incredibly fast even compared to a VelociRaptor. I say go for it...you can be sure that your disk subsystem isn't the slowest part of your computer.

 

 

EDIT: I assume by PCI you mean PCI-express? If you mean normal PCI that will end up being your bottleneck (at ~500 MB/s).

[horseboy666]

Okay I have 2 WD Velociraptor 300 GB GLFS, but selling them off for $500 Canadian total and going to buy 4 Crucial CT64M225 M225 64 GB SATA 2 drives, and I am going to throw them onto a pci raid card and run them in RAID 0.

 

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=41633

 

They are each on sale for 165.51 Canadian if you are a premier partner, which i am.

 

when I had my Velociraptors in RAID 0, I was getting roughly 150 MB/s using HD TUNE (free version)

 

Using just 1, I would get roughly 100 MB/s a gain of 50%

 

 

Now I am to understand that SSD stack completely in RAID 0, example, the Crucial SSD I am buying, are rated at

 

200 MB/s read and 150 MB/s write, if I get 4 in RAID 0, it should be 800 MB/s Read and 600 MB/s Write (theoretically)

 

Now SATA 2 has a limit of 300 MB/s... does this mean that I will only see a maximum of 300 MB/s?? or is that PER Sata 2 port? meaning if I have 4, it would be 300 MB/s (limit) x 4 = 1,200 MB/s limit combined

 

So which is it, maximum 300 MB/s total, or is it PER port.

 

If the Max is 300 MB/s no matter what, then I will just get 2 128 GB SSD and be at the max.

 

Let me know, thanks in advance.

 

P.S. I searched for this before posting, couldnt find a real answer, so please dont tell me to google it or search.

[Hemidare]

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/2861/fou...in_7/index.html

 

That should answer your questions.

[horseboy666]

The SATA 3 Gb/s rating is per port. Assuming you have a good RAID card you will get near-linear scaling in terms of both IOPs and bandwidth (read and write) in RAID 0 with SSDs.

 

I have a single Indilix drive in my desktop and it's incredibly fast even compared to a VelociRaptor. I say go for it...you can be sure that your disk subsystem isn't the slowest part of your computer.

 

 

EDIT: I assume by PCI you mean PCI-express? If you mean normal PCI that will end up being your bottleneck (at ~500 MB/s).

 

I was going to get this card because it was cheap

 

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku...anufacture=Syba

 

but realized its PCI, not PCI-Express, also that its Sata 1... so 150 mb/s per port max

 

Thinking of going this way

 

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku...ture=SuperMicro

 

what do you think of that card?

 

Should I just toss this motherboard and get a better one that has RAID controller already on it? If so, suggestions? I would like to stick with Gigabyte, because they work VERY well with Hackintosh systems, yes I am running OS X Leopard as a dual boot on here along with Windows 7 RC 64 bit.

 

Dont go to crazy with the motherboard though, just something decent and works well.

[horseboy666]

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/2861/fou...in_7/index.html

 

That should answer your questions.

 

I was going to get this card because it was cheap

 

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku...anufacture=Syba

 

but realized its PCI, not PCI-Express, also that its Sata 1... so 150 mb/s per port max

 

Thinking of going this way

 

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku...ture=SuperMicro

 

what do you think of that card?

 

Should I just toss this motherboard and get a better one that has RAID controller already on it? If so, suggestions? I would like to stick with Gigabyte, because they work VERY well with Hackintosh systems, yes I am running OS X Leopard as a dual boot on here along with Windows 7 RC 64 bit.

 

Dont go to crazy with the motherboard though, just something decent and works well.

 

 

***** I know i posted on the wrong section before, I intended to post on storage, not on the Overclocking board. If you can delete the other one, please do so, did not mean for a double post.

[anthony]

Your RAID controller, onboard or not (if you end up buying a card or not) will have significant impact on your storage performance. Have a look at this thread here: http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.p...=165364&hl=, it was only two SSD drives, but still the point is quite clear.

[horseboy666]

Your RAID controller, onboard or not (if you end up buying a card or not) will have significant impact on your storage performance. Have a look at this thread here: http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.p...=165364&hl=, it was only two SSD drives, but still the point is quite clear.

 

I am going to upgrade to this motherboard

 

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku...acture=Gigabyte

 

It is good for me since its got 4 slots for RAM, 2 PCI-E 2.0 slots incase i decide to crossfire later on or sli

 

also its highly compatible with MAC OS X Retail installation

 

and its got onboard RAID, with 8 SATA 2 ports. Think I made the decision here, anyone think it is stupid of me to get this board? Right now I have a Gigabyte G31M-ES2L, got it solely for its compatibility with MAC OS X Retail install, but now I see this other board is highly compatible too.

[Waco]

A real PCI-E hardware controller will help but for RAID 0 it doesn't matter *as* much. I'd still suggest getting a decent controller to maximize bandwidth and minimize service time.

[horseboy666]

A real PCI-E hardware controller will help but for RAID 0 it doesn't matter *as* much. I'd still suggest getting a decent controller to maximize bandwidth and minimize service time.

 

I ended up ordering only 3 SSD @ 64 GB each. Dont see a reason to have more than 450 MB/s write speed (theoretically) I wont really notice, its going to be my Operating system drive with programs installed, files and hardly used programs will be sent to the 500 GB hard drive. Ordered that motherboard too, along with 1200 MHz DDR2 sticks 4 GB

 

Ill post my results here with HD Tune and I will post my overclocking results with the new motherboard.

[XxHellxRaizerxX]

when I had my Velociraptors in RAID 0, I was getting roughly 150 MB/s using HD TUNE (free version)

 

Using just 1, I would get roughly 100 MB/s a gain of 50%

When I read this I wanted to see how my drives stacked up against some raptors. I have two WD 640GB Cavair Blues (16MB Cache) and they average 200MB/s on HD Tune. This is RAID 0 on a SB750. That doesn't seem right to me. Shouldn't a couple of Raptors out-do my Caviars?

 

138.7MB/s Min

220.6MB/s Max

201.3MB/s Average

8.6ms response time

 

Btw, anyone who says it's not worth it to RAID 0 mechanical drives is talking non-sense imo. These were getting maybe 110MB/s alone so this is a vast improvement.

 

Edited August 30, 2009 by XxHellxRaizerxX

[horseboy666]

When I read this I wanted to see how my drives stacked up against some raptors. I have two WD 640GB Cavair Blues (16MB Cache) and they average 200MB/s on HD Tune. This is RAID 0 on a SB750. That doesn't seem right to me. Shouldn't a couple of Raptors out-do my Caviars?

 

138.7MB/s Min

220.6MB/s Max

201.3MB/s Average

8.6ms response time

 

Btw, anyone who says it's not worth it to RAID 0 mechanical drives is talking non-sense imo. These were getting maybe 110MB/s alone so this is a vast improvement.

 

 

 

I have now just a single WD Velociraptor right now and its showing 103 MB/s average, 125 max, 77 MB min, 7.1 access, 176.9 MB/s burst, CPU usage -1%

 

How the hell is your Caviar getting 110 MB/s beating my velociraptor... is mine defective or something?

 

oh and mind you I ran the test on it as a secondary drive, not as primary (operating system) so my numbers should be even better...