Intel Z68 SSD Caching

Montala · 29 Dec 2011 at 12:42

Westyfield2 said:
What I think I'll do on my next rig is instead of my current setup (120GB SSD & HDD) is have a 60GB SSD with OS & Important Apps on it, a HDD with the data & other Apps on it, and a second 60GB SSD but setup as a cache for the HDD. Best of both options .

I was wondering if this option would work if a 32GB (or even a 64 GB) USB stick was used in place of the second SSD?

Thoughts anyone?

Yamahahahahaha · 29 Dec 2011 at 12:57

MOOGLEYS said:
I have a 60gb agility 3 and a 2tb drive. I did have the ssd for windows and the 2tb for games, steam etc.
Would I be better using the 2tb as the main drive and ssd as a cache? Will it matter if I partition the 2tb drive so I have a seperate windows partition, will it cache both partitions?

The Intel RST sees drives as logical volumes. In the one box I've played with, I set up a RAID1 (2 physical, 1 logical) and put the cache infront of that.
Works very nicely.

The best part about the cache is the hands-off nature of the improvement.
If you don't mind managing what goes on your SSD, then you'll get the benefit precisely where you want it.

Yamahahahahaha · 29 Dec 2011 at 12:59

Montala said:
I was wondering if this option would work if a 32GB (or even a 64 GB) USB stick was used in place of the second SSD?

Thoughts anyone?

My hunch would be no. It has to be on the Intel SATA controller.
I suppose you could use an adapter but USB -> SATA adapters are really awful at the best of times.

MOOGLEYS · 29 Dec 2011 at 13:35

Yamahahahahaha said:
The Intel RST sees drives as logical volumes. In the one box I've played with, I set up a RAID1 (2 physical, 1 logical) and put the cache infront of that.
Works very nicely.

The best part about the cache is the hands-off nature of the improvement.
If you don't mind managing what goes on your SSD, then you'll get the benefit precisely where you want it.

I kind of understand that I think

not very good with raid etc. Would I be better just using the SSD as a system drive and the 2tb for games. Or the 2TB as a sytem and games drive with the SSD as a cache drive to this with a seperate partition on the 2tb for windows... :confused:

Yamahahahahaha · 29 Dec 2011 at 13:53

MOOGLEYS said:
I kind of understand that I think not very good with raid etc. Would I be better just using the SSD as a system drive and the 2tb for games. Or the 2TB as a sytem and games drive with the SSD as a cache drive to this with a seperate partition on the 2tb for windows...

Keeping them seperate means you must look after and choose what goes on your SSD. If you're happy and capable to do that, great!

Having the 2TB with SSD cache means you'll get a more general boost, but may find things you want on the SSD, aren't always there (even with a 60GB cache!).

durbs · 29 Dec 2011 at 16:13

Yamahahahahaha said:
Keeping them seperate means you must look after and choose what goes on your SSD. If you're happy and capable to do that, great!

This is the big problem for me, I built my rig with the intention of getting an SSD as a main drive further down the line. I originally thought a 256GB SSD would be enough for a main drive but, given how quickly the space on my newish build has been gobbled up, it wouldn't be big enough now. Prices of the 512 drives are still way too silly to consider.

There's a few games on there which I tend not to remove as they generally get a replay at some point so on an SSD I'd have to choose that Skyrim goes on the quick SSD drive whereas Witcher goes on the slow disk or have to constantly juggle and move things.

Looks like with caching, all my stuff gets a bit of a boost (and i'm pretty happy with the performance of my mechanical drive anyway so anything at all on top of that would be great) and there's no messing around having to manage space.

Glad to see then that there's a few recommendations in this thread for using it.

Yamahahahahaha · 29 Dec 2011 at 16:34

In your situation, you can have both.

The Cache will provide some degree of automated boost (Windows files etc.) and you can still tinker with moving stuff around.
256GB is pretty luxurious, but not quite enough for a big Steam catalogue I suppose.

SMed · 29 Dec 2011 at 16:37

I can definitely see the benefit of both options. I think I'll initially start off with a small SSD as a main drive. If the data shuffling gets on my nerves too I'll cache a HDD. But since I don't really game or install much software, it shouldn't be too much of an issue.

horrorwood · 29 Dec 2011 at 21:28

SMed said:
I can definitely see the benefit of both options. I think I'll initially start off with a small SSD as a main drive. If the data shuffling gets on my nerves too I'll cache a HDD. But since I don't really game or install much software, it shouldn't be too much of an issue.

If you don't really game or install much software surely you'd be better off using cache?

My theory is everything you use regularly will be in the cache anyway

liamcrane · 29 Dec 2011 at 21:50

How does the cache actually work? what does it actually store on the SSD for the mechnical drive to respond quicker? im kinda new to this

MOOGLEYS · 29 Dec 2011 at 22:26

Just been playing with this before my z68 board gave up and it actually works quite well. Very noticeable drive speed increase not ssd quick but considerably quicker than just a mechanical drive...

durbs · 29 Dec 2011 at 23:43

liamcrane said:
How does the cache actually work? what does it actually store on the SSD for the mechnical drive to respond quicker? im kinda new to this

It works off block addresses on the hard drive, if its sees a block being regularly read or written then it will move that data into cache where it will stay until the cache fills and it is pushed out to make way for more recent data. For that reason, it needs to first learn what you use most.

It is also 'clever' enough to distinguish high value data such as application, boot and user data from other things like files opened by your virus scanner or a tune or video you rip once to disk and prioritise them accordingly.

One thing I forgot to add, is anyone using a particular SSD for caching? I know Intel released a 'special' SLC SSD model or will any 60 gig drive perform the same is real life?

durbs · 30 Dec 2011 at 00:15

Also note, you don't need Z68, you can add a non-intel solution like this if you haven't got Z68: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-090-OC&groupid=701&catid=2104&subcat=910

SMed · 30 Dec 2011 at 01:05

horrorwood said:
If you don't really game or install much software surely you'd be better off using cache?

My theory is everything you use regularly will be in the cache anyway

I'll be running Photoshop in the future, and maybe a game or two. But my system will be pretty stable (as in not changing it too often) and will fit in on a 64GB SSD easily. If it will all fit, and it's faster to have it on the SSD, then I don't see a compelling reason to cache a larger drive for worse performance (even if it's not that bad).

But again, I reserve the right to change the configuration at a later date if I need/want to.

Yamahahahahaha · 30 Dec 2011 at 01:11

durbs said:
One thing I forgot to add, is anyone using a particular SSD for caching? I know Intel released a 'special' SLC SSD model or will any 60 gig drive perform the same is real life?

SLC is preferable from a reliability standpoint. Specifically in the number of cycles each cell will do vs. MLC.
'In Real Life', assuming light to medium usage, I don't see why a Crucial M4 or an Intel 320 wouldn't last ~5 years without issue.
If you don't mind paying for a 120GB SSD, you could simply leave the empty space unused and have it as overprovisioning for the cache.

For those feeling a bit flush, LSI's Cachecade Pro 2.0 is worth a look.

Darkman · 30 Dec 2011 at 07:52

Yamahahahahaha said:
The Intel RST sees drives as logical volumes. In the one box I've played with, I set up a RAID1 (2 physical, 1 logical) and put the cache infront of that.
Works very nicely.

The best part about the cache is the hands-off nature of the improvement.
If you don't mind managing what goes on your SSD, then you'll get the benefit precisely where you want it.

So I could use my trusty old Samsung SLC 32Gb drives in Raid 0 as the cache then and use newer faster MLC drives for the OS and more critical apps?

MOOGLEYS · 30 Dec 2011 at 10:12

I'm wondering if you can run two ssd's in the system and have one as a boot and system drive and the other to cache a larger drive for games etc.
I have two 60GB ssd's and thinking I might try and set it up like this but not sure if it's possible. Anyone any ideas ?

SMed · 30 Dec 2011 at 10:47

MOOGLEYS said:
I'm wondering if you can run two ssd's in the system and have one as a boot and system drive and the other to cache a larger drive for games etc.
I have two 60GB ssd's and thinking I might try and set it up like this but not sure if it's possible. Anyone any ideas ?

Yeah, I think you can. That's what I plan on doing since I can only afford to get a smaller single SSD for right now. When I can afford another, I'll cache a larger storage HDD.

Pretty sure/hope you can do this. I know that if you try to smart cache with a larger SSD, it only uses 64GB and partitions the rest for storage. You can install the OS on the partitioned storage and the other partition will cache the HDD.

liamcrane · 30 Dec 2011 at 12:31

durbs said:
It works off block addresses on the hard drive, if its sees a block being regularly read or written then it will move that data into cache where it will stay until the cache fills and it is pushed out to make way for more recent data. For that reason, it needs to first learn what you use most.

It is also 'clever' enough to distinguish high value data such as application, boot and user data from other things like files opened by your virus scanner or a tune or video you rip once to disk and prioritise them accordingly.

One thing I forgot to add, is anyone using a particular SSD for caching? I know Intel released a 'special' SLC SSD model or will any 60 gig drive perform the same is real life?

Thanks for this mate, makes perfect sense now. I have been looking around for a small 20gb msata ssd but they seem to be kind of pricey considering the small amount of storage space they offer

Destination · 30 Dec 2011 at 12:39

Surprising no producer, or indeed intel themselves didn't make an integrated motherboard solution for this.