500 gb 840 evo raid 0.

[jchambers2586]

looking to get 1TB of SSD storage should I do a RAID0 or separate drive setup? trim is supported on Z77 RAID which I have. I have asked Intel. they said yes trim is supported on the newer drivers which I have.

 

[Alec Mowat]

If you need any form of reliability, don't use a RAID0. Use two separate 1 TB disks.

 

[jchambers2586]

I don't need 2TB of ssd storage I only need 1.

 

[Alec Mowat]

Just buy a 1TB disk then, no point in getting two matching 500GB disks unless you already own them. It will be more expensive and there's no real benefit, other than performance.
You can't use a RAID0 as a reliable method of storage.

 

[popatim]

My samsung 830's have been in a raid 0 for over 3 years now without issues.
While the possibility of a problem does exist, doing proper backups of important data and know full well that you may wind up reinstalling everything should a drive have an issue and you lose the raid0. If you understand and accept these issues then running a raid0 is fine IMO. Do not expect to see an improvement in speed outside of benchmarks though. Raid 0 gets you space and sequential speed at the cost of random read/write performance (which is how most users are accessing their drives). Toms examined SSDs in raid and came to the same conclusion in that normal users are actually slowed down by a raid0: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-raid-benchmark,3485.html

Btw - in a raid array you will not be able to enable samsung's rapid mode either.

 

[Alec Mowat]

My samsung 830's have been in a raid 0 for over 3 years now without issues.
While the possibility of a problem does exist, doing proper backups of important data and know full well that you may wind up reinstalling everything should a drive have an issue and you lose the raid0. If you understand and accept these issues then running a raid0 is fine IMO. Do not expect to see an improvement in speed outside of benchmarks though. Raid 0 gets you space and sequential speed at the cost of random read/write performance (which is how most users are accessing their drives). Toms examined SSDs in raid and came to the same conclusion in that normal users are actually slowed down by a raid0: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-raid-benchmark,3485.html

Btw - in a raid array you will not be able to enable samsung's rapid mode either.

Seems Windows was the limiting factor in those other tests.
But

"Copying files is one way to take advantage of fast storage, SSDs in RAID included. In our three copy benchmarks, two fast SSDs working cooperatively overcome the limits of a single SATA 6Gb/s interface, pushing more throughput than any single drive can manage."

Anything on a RAID0 environment will be as-fast, or faster. If you can pick up two SSD's and RAID0 for less than a larger SSD (say if they are on sale), I'd go with it. For performance.

But if you want storage space, which does not require performance, than just use two separate disks. There's no purpose to a RAID0 purely for storage. My RAID0's are for performance.

 

[bvj]

Just buy a 1TB disk then, no point in getting two matching 500GB disks unless you already own them. It will be more expensive and there's no real benefit, other than performance.
You can't use a RAID0 as a reliable method of storage.

Implying a single drive is more reliable?

 

[Alec Mowat]

Just buy a 1TB disk then, no point in getting two matching 500GB disks unless you already own them. It will be more expensive and there's no real benefit, other than performance.
You can't use a RAID0 as a reliable method of storage.

Implying a single drive is more reliable?

vs RAID0?
Yes, it has half the chance of failure. If 1 disk in a RAID 0 fails, you have lost the data on both disks.

If you want a RAID0, then get my a second 1 or 2 TB disk and keeping a daily/weekly backup.