Which drive setup would be faster?

shadowake · 24 May 2009 at 10:19

Which drive setup would be faster?

4 standard 7200rpm SATA drives in RAID0
2 10000rpm raptors in RAID0
2 30GB OCZ solid series in RAID0
1 128GB Corsair SSD

:confused:

master811 · 24 May 2009 at 11:52

I suppose depends by what you mean faster, are you talking about sequential transfer rate, response time (of course that would be the SSDs) or random/read writes.

leexgx · 24 May 2009 at 12:05

1 samsung 128gb is faster then 2-3 15000 rpm disks get the samsung 128GB ssd or 256gb (hdds cant match the good SSDs even to an point bad SSds)
if you want no fuss with no raid just buy one SSD size (128gb or 256gb) that fits your needs and set the motherboard to AICH

do not get core or apex or gskill (JMicron SSd's bad), they can have Writeing issues on some motherboards (stuttering issue), if your wanting to keep cost down get the corsair S128 (samsung based 1gen) it may not have high data rate speeds but that does not matter so much with SSDs its the access time that makes windows and programs load very fast not date rate (hdds can't do random access very fast (12-30ms), SSds are <1ms and can still move data quite fast)

make sure you got an HDD as well to store nom and big files or backup on the system (keep all your work files on the HDD if thay are big so not not use all the space up)

i got an corsair S128 in my system right now and it works very well (takes 37 seconds to boot 20 secs BIOS 17 secs once it gets to the boot from SSD part)

got an list below
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=14132944#post14132944

you never want to use an hard disk agane (to boot from) once you used SSD

shadowake · 24 May 2009 at 17:53

I've got 2 (old) raptors in RAID0 at the min, but am getting a new system. I want to keep the cost down but make sure performance is at least a bit better than before.

Is the Samsung (Gen 2) much faster than the Corsair (Gen 1)? £100 extra seems a lot, but if it's justified in performance I may save up a bit longer.

Rroff · 24 May 2009 at 18:31

3x Seagate 7200.12s with the 500gig platter will saturate the theoretical max of a SATA 3Gb controller. But the access times will be not even close to SSD.

leexgx · 24 May 2009 at 23:27

yep most users want fast pcs not massive data rate as well (but you can have both with the samsung one)

@shadowake
the samsung one is upto or above 200MB/s read and Up to 190MB/s write (faster then 2x raptors right there), i do have an corsair S128 now (90MB/s read 70MB/s write) may seem slow but it has an access time of less then <1ms on reads, and no HDD can match that and makes vista a lot faster and the Crap it some times runs in the background does not interfere with other programs that are loading up

i can instant open any program soon as i can see my desktop, on my opera browser all 30 tabs open in 1-2 secs on my WD black drive id still have to wait before the page has loaded on each each tab

shadowake · 25 May 2009 at 09:49

leexgx said:
yep most users want fast pcs not massive data rate as well (but you can have both with the samsung one)

@shadowake
the samsung one is upto or above 200MB/s read and Up to 190MB/s write (faster then 2x raptors right there), i do have an corsair S128 now (90MB/s read 70MB/s write) may seem slow but it has an access time of less then <1ms on reads, and no HDD can match that and makes vista a lot faster and the Crap it some times runs in the background does not interfere with other programs that are loading up

i can instant open any program soon as i can see my desktop, on my opera browser all 30 tabs open in 1-2 secs on my WD black drive id still have to wait before the page has loaded on each each tab

Thanks leexgx, would you say the samsung is worth the extra or would it not be that noticable in real world use? What would the Samsung be faster at compared to the Corsair?