Choosing SSD for RAID 0

RushTfe

Commendable
Aug 31, 2016
5
0
1,510
0
Hi!!

Im looking for a couple of SSD's for a Raid on my system, and these are my options:

x2 SSD Samsung 850 EVO BASIC 250Gb
x2 SSD Kingston 240Gb HyperX SAVAGE 560/530
x2 SSD SANDISK 240Gb Ultra II 520/550MBps


Mostly its gonna be a Gaming PC, and OS will be installed on RAID, of course. What would be your choice and why? i'll do my purchase on september 6th

there´s also an Intel choice, but not sure which one is it, since my provider doesnt show pics, and name is not full, i'll leave it herem just in case

x2 SSD INTEL 240Gb Sata3 2.5" (SSDSC2KW240H6X1)

looking for code on google, seems to be that one:


SSD's Intel Web Page
 
RAID 0 doesn't offer any real benefit to gamers. It mostly boosts sequential reads/writes which helps people that handle huge files (e.g. CAD projects), while random reads remain pretty much the same. Getting a 500GB 850 Evo would be more cost effective and just as good as getting two 250GB ones.
 
RAID 0 doesn't offer any real benefit to gamers. It mostly boosts sequential reads/writes which helps people that handle huge files (e.g. CAD projects), while random reads remain pretty much the same. Getting a 500GB 850 Evo would be more cost effective and just as good as getting two 250GB ones.
 
^ Agreed.

There are very few situations where the increased read/write speed of RAID 0 for SSDs will come in handy, mostly just when transferring data to another array that can actually match the transfer speed.

But buy going with RAID 0 (even more so on OS drive) you are setting yourself up for data loss because if one drive has problems then all the data is lost.
 

RushTfe

Commendable
Aug 31, 2016
5
0
1,510
0
So, OS loading times, app loading times, etc... wont change? (from 1 SSD)

I use to work with photoshop and after effects too (not professional or job) and have many APPS opened at the same time. Also use to work with archives larger than 5GB (5 to 50 some of them).

Main use will be gaming for sure, and avoiding the possibility of having one ssd damaged, is it much better to have only one for 500GB? (same price 1x500 or 2x250) I thought even when it was a few, RAID 0 will be better (just performance wises)

EDIT: is it the same SSD "Samsung 850 EVO" and "Samsung 850 EVO Basic"??
 

ael00

Honorable
Feb 12, 2013
230
0
10,710
22
not really, the performance gains are only bling numbers in benchmarks. real life boot speed / access times do not change much. And the elephant in the room, you would need a decent hardware controller for raid 0 to pull off those negligable gains, so the cost of 2x250gb drives in raid 0 do not equal 1 500gb drive.
 

RushTfe

Commendable
Aug 31, 2016
5
0
1,510
0
Nice, so it seems that only one SSD will be better than RAID 0.

Then (Should have done it before) that's my pc

Motherboared: Asus P8-H77 V-LE
Proccessor: Intel I5 2320
Memory: 12GB DDR3
SSD: OCZ Agility 3 (Old One) 120GB
Second drive: Old 2TB WD (Sata 2)
Graphic Card: Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 Gaming


Everyone seems to really like the samsung choice, but my provider doesnt have 500GB Version. They have the Kingston and Sandisk Choices.

Here are all the options, in case you see better choices.

 

RushTfe

Commendable
Aug 31, 2016
5
0
1,510
0
Ill take your tip guys. So, which from the list would you recommend me? (need 480-500GB drive) Id love to take the samsung, but not there.

Is it the same the evo basic and the evo??
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
159,588
12,746
176,090
24,410


Samsung EVO 850.
I've never heard it called 'basic', but presumably that is te same thing.
 

RushTfe

Commendable
Aug 31, 2016
5
0
1,510
0
found an 850 EVO 500GB in a different provider.

So, thats the option? anything to say with the other SSDs?

Thanks for your help anyway!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY