Question Improve RAID 0 Performance?

[dargo72]

Here are my system specs:

Device name Precision-7760
Processor 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-11500H @ 2.90GHz 2.92 GHz
Installed RAM 8.00 GB (7.27 GB usable)
Windows 11 Pro

I have 2 Samsung 990 Pro (2TB) drives configured in RAID 0. I feel that my performance is not as good as it should be.

I am using CrystalDiskMark (NVMe SSD settings) and here are the results:

https://imgur.com/90In1WE

View: https://imgur.com/90In1WE


I feel I should be getting better results. Also, in disk management it looks like this....

https://imgur.com/vB9BRUP

View: https://imgur.com/vB9BRUP


It seems odd that it states that one drive is "missing".

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Thank you....

 

[USAFRet]

Your Disk 0, the C drive, shows as a single 2TB drive.
The drive at the bottom, Missing/Dynamic, is also a 2TB. But not part of this RAID 0.

However you configured this RAID 0, its not done right.

Your CrystalDiskMark performance is just about what a single 990 Pro should do.

But......​

RAID 0 + SSD often hase worse user facing performance than individual drives.
Sequential benchmark numbers may look uber awesome, but the actual performance, not so much.

 

[SkyNetRising]

I have 2 Samsung 990 Pro (2TB) drives configured in RAID 0. I feel that my performance is not as good as it should be.
I am using CrystalDiskMark (NVMe SSD settings) and here are the results:
I feel I should be getting better results. Also, in disk management it looks like this....
It seems odd that it states that one drive is "missing".
Any thoughts are appreciated.

Can you show screenshot from Device Manager - disk drives and storage controllers sections expanded?
Benchmark is showing results for single drive (not raided drives). C: is located on single drive.

But your raid has failed.

 

[USAFRet]

And given that this was supposed to be a RAID 0, and one of the drives is missing, but the system still actually works...it was never set up correctly from the start.

A RAID 0 array missing one drive results in total non-functionality.

 

[SkyNetRising]

And given that this was supposed to be a RAID 0, and one of the drives is missing, but the system still actually works...it was never set up correctly from the start.
A RAID 0 array missing one drive results in total non-functionality.

OS is not located on raided drives.
Why would failed raid cause system operation failure?

 

[USAFRet]

OS is not located on raided drives.
Why would failed raid cause system operation failure?

Disk 0 is a 2TB, labeled "Samsung 990 Pro 2TB RAID 0 (C"

The CDM screenshot shows it as the C drive.

Hence...the OS.

And loss of a single drive from a RAID 0 array (striped) means the whole array is non-functional.

 

[geofelt]

For many reasons, you should probably not be trying to run raid 0

Raid-0 has been over hyped as a performance enhancer.
Sequential benchmarks do look wonderful, but the real world does not seem to deliver the indicated performance benefits for most
desktop users. The reason is, that sequential benchmarks are coded for maximum overlapped I/O rates.
It depends on reading a stripe of data simultaneously from each raid-0 member, and that is rarely what we do.
The OS does mostly small random reads and writes, so raid-0 is of little use there.
In fact, if your block of data were to be spanned on two drives, random times would be greater.
There are some apps that will benefit. They are characterized by reading large files in a sequential overlapped manner.

Here is a older study using ssd devices in raid-0.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-raid-benchmark,3485.html

And a newer report:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-950-pro-256gb-raid-report,4449-4.html

Spoiler... no benefit at all.

 

[dargo72]

Wow, thank you for all of the replies.

I was afraid to touch anything as I was unsure if the RAID was working or not and did not want to lose everything. I think I will reformat the second drive and use it for One Drive, games, etc. The 512GB drive is the one that came with the computer, and I am just using that for Windows backup tasks.

This is technically the computer I use most often for work, but frankly I use it for almost everything. My main computer is an Alienware x17 R2 that is very fast. I ordered it with 2 1TB drive in RAID 0. Out of curiosity, would a single 990 Pro be faster than the drives purchased with the computer, or would their RAID 0 still be faster? I could put the 2TB 990 Pro into that computer if it makes sense.

A note for a future question..... I purchased 32GB of RAM for this "work" computer. It had 8GB installed. I would like to add the 32GB to the open slots that are readily accessible. Removal of the 8GB requires removal of the keyboard, which I'd prefer not do unless 1) 40GB of memory is not recognized by the computer. 2) The 8GB is in single channel and the 32 would be in dual.... performance hit? 3) It makes more sense to just take out the 8GB and install the 32GB in the slots under the keyboard.

Thanks again....

 

[USAFRet]

Wow, thank you for all of the replies.

I was afraid to touch anything as I was unsure if the RAID was working or not and did not want to lose everything. I think I will reformat the second drive and use it for One Drive, games, etc. The 512GB drive is the one that came with the computer, and I am just using that for Windows backup tasks.

This is technically the computer I use most often for work, but frankly I use it for almost everything. My main computer is an Alienware x17 R2 that is very fast. I ordered it with 2 1TB drive in RAID 0. Out of curiosity, would a single 990 Pro be faster than the drives purchased with the computer, or would their RAID 0 still be faster? I could put the 2TB 990 Pro into that computer if it makes sense.

A note for a future question..... I purchased 32GB of RAM for this "work" computer. It had 8GB installed. I would like to add the 32GB to the open slots that are readily accessible. Removal of the 8GB requires removal of the keyboard, which I'd prefer not do unless 1) 40GB of memory is not recognized by the computer. 2) The 8GB is in single channel and the 32 would be in dual.... performance hit? 3) It makes more sense to just take out the 8GB and install the 32GB in the slots under the keyboard.

Thanks again....

The RAID 0 would show impressive benchmark numbers.
But NO actual user facing performance benefit.

RAM - Mixing RAM often fails.
As much of a pain it is, remove the existing 8GB and just install the 32GB set.

 

[USAFRet]

My main computer is an Alienware x17 R2 that is very fast. I ordered it with 2 1TB drive in RAID 0. Out of curiosity, would a single 990 Pro be faster than the drives purchased with the computer, or would their RAID 0 still be faster?

What actual M.2 ports are available?
PCIe 3.0 or 4.0?

What specific drives are in it now?

 

[SkyNetRising]

I ordered it with 2 1TB drive in RAID 0. Out of curiosity, would a single 990 Pro be faster than the drives purchased with the computer, or would their RAID 0 still be faster? I could put the 2TB 990 Pro into that computer if it makes sense.

Please show screenshot from Device Manager - disk drives and storage controllers sections expanded.

Disk 0 is a 2TB, labeled "Samsung 990 Pro 2TB RAID 0 (C"
The CDM screenshot shows it as the C drive.
Hence...the OS.

I'm pretty sure, OP doesn't know, what drives he has.
You can set volume name to whatever you want. Doesn't necessary mean anything.

 

[USAFRet]

I'm pretty sure, OP doesn't know, what drives he has.
You can set volume name to whatever you want. Doesn't necessary mean anything.

Right.
But still, we have a completely non-configured "RAID 0".

There seems to be 2 or 3x 2TB drives in this, only one of which is actually working. Disk 0.

If the RAID 0 had been working at one point, and one of the drives in the array 'failed'....it would no longer work, at all.