SSD's

example to identical HDS not ssd have the same read and write speeds, one is then a

single drive .

say for example;
80 mb/s read
100 mb/s write

do raid 0 then

160mb/s read
200 mb/s write

thats in general practice a lot depends on the controller ie "quality off" for the hard drives.
 
looking at the specs for that ssd yes that is very fast very simular to what I'am going to get in October , and better hopefully by then . I'am going to get 2 128 gb ssds then as corrently my installation is at 164gb for vista 64 bit at the moment :-)
 
siege2 said:
example to identical HDS not ssd have the same read and write speeds, one is then a

single drive .

say for example;
80 mb/s read
100 mb/s write

do raid 0 then

160mb/s read
200 mb/s write

thats in general practice a lot depends on the controller ie "quality off" for the hard drives.
Click to expand...

That's true.. when moving large files. Unfortunately, rarely are large files being accessed in OS usage, so RAID 0 is a smaller improvement than you might imagine.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter too much, but don't get drawn into transfer speed benchmark whoring, it's practically irrelevant with regards to the performance you see on a day-to-day basis.
And take a look at the Agility series. If I were buying an SSD today, the four drives I would look at would be: 1st generation 64gb Samsung SSD, Corsair S128 (similar to 1st gen Samsung in performance), G.Skill Falcon 128GB, and OCZ Agility 120GB.
The former two are cheaper so more space per gigabyte while retaining the fast access times of SSDs, so very good performance even though not quite so good as the Falcon or Agility (or Vertex). The latter two have similar speed to the Vertex but for cheaper - they are better performers than the former two, but you pay for it.
Personally I wouldn't RAID two SSDs together, if I decided I needed more space than 64GB I'd get a 128GB one, not just because it's cheaper than buying two 64GB (and I believe gives similar performance, although others will disagree), but because I have more flexibility - I could put it in my laptop, for example, whereas I can't put two 64GB ones in there.

Anyway, it's up to you.
 
I have RAID 0 SSDs vertex.

Random access makes no difference (system is as snappy with and without RAID), but when it comes to loading a new scene in a game and copying over huge files it flies.

If you are after the "snap" when double clicking an icon then a single will do it, if you need all rounded performance across the board RAID it.

(my experience)
 
grrrrrr im so confused now. i have no idea which one to get.
i see both arguments, but still dont have any idea.
i dont have the money for 2 120gb, i would either get a single ocz 120gb vertex or agilty or 2 64gb samsung. awwww people please help.
 
based on the discussion here logical choice will be a single 120 gb one, you cant go wrong :-)
 
haha thats what i like to see, a single straight answer.

i should do the sebsible thing and just stick with that.
but what would happen if i say i wanted the ssd to make everything faster, and less loading time. would you still recommend a single one?
 
... only things RAID0 is good for in SSDs over a single is in loading some games (which store lots of information in a couple of very large files rather than hundreds of small ones) and something like video editing where frequently using very large files. If you're not doing either of those then you will barely see ANY loading time difference by RAIDing.

based on the discussion here logical choice will be a single 120 gb one, you cant go wrong :-)
Click to expand...

This.
 
I have win 7 RC on mine, no idea how long it takes to boot on hdds but the mobo screens are actually on for longer than when it boots windows lol

btw if i were you i'd try get a single drive that supports TRIM
 
Last edited:
RAID is not as important on SSDs some like the game to load 2-3 seconds faster then 1 SSD, boot time be no faster with 2 SSDs in raid as when its booting up its mostly all random access, boot up maybe be longer due to raid setup (still 2-3 secs)

Buy the Size you need, i recommend going for min 128gb as 64gb will get filled up fast
get the samsung or Corsair 128gb SSD, or if you want more data rate speed get the faster samsung drives for £100, the faster SSD more then makes up for the speed then using RAID and losing the TRIM support as well when it comes

do try to keep 20GB free on any type of SSDs

(edit)
TRIM basically keeps the Drives Write speed at an high rate and keeps the SSD tidy (bit more complicated then that) Trim ATA command is only support on windows 7 and most likely linux, no SSD supports TRIM yet but there will be an update for most SSDs to add the command
 
Last edited:
from here it be the
corsair S128 £171 in stock


are cool OC has the OCZ Agility £255 in stock now (the Agility is the Vertex slower Flash but only affects Write speeds so day to day you not notice it {50MB/s slower}), i would get an the samsung or corsair if they was in stock as the Write speeds are not caped (and its only £5-£8 more)

the ones listed below are second gen SSDs and have around 200MB/s data rate speeds
the samsung £258, Corsair P128(samsung) £270, falcon £278, OCZ vertex £328 (1 left at time of posting) are not in stock

the vertex is now over priced as the falcon is the same SSD same firmware as well
 
Last edited:
Ghost-Reaper said:
There is a fair bit if tweaking involved to set them up and maintain them regarding turning off defrag, prefetch, pagefile etc. The ocz drives have a really good support forum and regular updates to improve the drives (if you get one of theirs)
Click to expand...

question - why turn those off?
 
neil_g said:
question - why turn those off?
Click to expand...

Because it prolongs the life of the drive by unnecessary writes to the drive. Not to mention with access times of <1ms, the prefetch is moot. And defrag is also pointless for SSD because they access data at the same speed no matter where on the drive it is located.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom