Micron Enterprise SSD is ''Fastest SATA Drive''

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
RAID 0 SSD's is a dangerous waste of money. SSD's real advantage are their IO ops, which isn't going to be enhanced by RAID. The real advantage to RAID is the throughput. In this case especially, the added throughput is not going to help the average gamer/enthusiast. It is surly not worth the risk of losing one of the drives and losing all your data.
 
[citation][nom]JasonAkkerman[/nom]RAID 0 SSD's is a dangerous waste of money. SSD's real advantage are their IO ops, which isn't going to be enhanced by RAID. The real advantage to RAID is the throughput. In this case especially, the added throughput is not going to help the average gamer/enthusiast. It is surly not worth the risk of losing one of the drives and losing all your data.[/citation]


And SSD, let alone an Enterprise SSD is very unlikely to fail.
 
[citation][nom]JasonAkkerman[/nom]RAID 0 SSD's is a dangerous waste of money. SSD's real advantage are their IO ops, which isn't going to be enhanced by RAID. The real advantage to RAID is the throughput. In this case especially, the added throughput is not going to help the average gamer/enthusiast. It is surly not worth the risk of losing one of the drives and losing all your data.[/citation]
Im not the average enthusiast ;p
 
[citation][nom]Grims[/nom]And SSD, let alone an Enterprise SSD is very unlikely to fail.[/citation]

It's your data. You choose what risk level you want to live with. RAID 0 is just a bad choice for SSD's. Real enterprise solutions would be RAID 5 or 6 based. Given the added safety of parity those are both acceptable solutions.
 
[citation][nom]JasonAkkerman[/nom]It's your data. You choose what risk level you want to live with. RAID 0 is just a bad choice for SSD's. Real enterprise solutions would be RAID 5 or 6 based. Given the added safety of parity those are both acceptable solutions.[/citation]

And just how hard is it to back-up all your data on a cheap, 1TB hard drive which can be found for ~$60 nowadays? You're spending almost four digits on SSDs, might as well...

There is nothing wrong with RAID 0 SSDs, provided there's a reason a user requires that amount of throughput.
 
[citation][nom]JasonAkkerman[/nom]RAID 0 SSD's is a dangerous waste of money. SSD's real advantage are their IO ops, which isn't going to be enhanced by RAID. The real advantage to RAID is the throughput. In this case especially, the added throughput is not going to help the average gamer/enthusiast. It is surly not worth the risk of losing one of the drives and losing all your data.[/citation]

IOps are not improved in RAID? You do realize increased throughput is directly related to increased I/O...

If your I/O was not improving how would throughput increase?
 
imho,
Any workstation/enthusiast/gaming rig utilizing SSD(s) is only putting programs and software on them. Anyone putting regular files (office docs, images, videos, music) is wasting their money and disk space. An SSD raid array would be easy to backup since all it is holding is programs and the OS.

That being said, RAIDing SSDs is still not always a good idea since you lose trim and must rely on the hardware's (usually) unreliable garbage collection methods to keep up to speed.
 
[citation][nom]chiral[/nom]imho,Any workstation/enthusiast/gaming rig utilizing SSD(s) is only putting programs and software on them. Anyone putting regular files (office docs, images, videos, music) is wasting their money and disk space. An SSD raid array would be easy to backup since all it is holding is programs and the OS.That being said, RAIDing SSDs is still not always a good idea since you lose trim and must rely on the hardware's (usually) unreliable garbage collection methods to keep up to speed.[/citation]

Obviously you've never heard of Pliant SSD's which are enterprise RAID SSD's that have no problem with RAID controllers performing outrageous transactions with little or no degradation in performance over time.
 
[citation][nom]Grims[/nom]And SSD, let alone an Enterprise SSD is very unlikely to fail.[/citation]
Every disk will fail later or sooner.
And mine 120GB SSD failed just last week with no warning, just not because of cell failure, but i can guess controller on it in fault as its detected as device, but no disk space on it.
 
[citation][nom]Computerrock1[/nom]I think two these on Raid 0 would bottleneck an entire system...[/citation]

Yup you might have a point there with the system trying to cope with all that data. Also depends on the config when these as raid0 2nd drive or main windows drive raid0 copy to other raid copy config then the stuff might hit the fan.

It is a pain using my old 30gb OCZ red ssd and copying 20gb data to my raid0 setup where I can max it and have bandwidth left over, just about locks the system up and this old thing is slow Read135Mb/s - Write70Mb/s avg.

Toms will really need to do a decent test on these things and the speed issues older pre x58 motherboards might have getting close to 500Mb/s or more. Surely a 4 or 6 channel Sata II chip can not run at max speed if all is connected and pushing tin.

Would be a good idea to get a decent raid card instead of the junk onboard if doing raid.

Any idea if there is any decent raid SATA III cards out there, not including OCZ $1100 PCI 750Mb/s drives.

Nice to see the Sata III write speeds catching up with Sata II write speeds finally.
Corsair Force CSSD-F40GB2 2.5" 40GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
# Sequential Access - Read: up to 280MB/s
# Sequential Access - Write: up to 270MB/s

Crucial RealSSD C300 CTFDDAC128MAG-1G1 2.5" 128GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
* Sequential Access - Read: 355MB/sec (SATA 6Gb/s) 265MB/sec (SATA 3Gb/s)
* Sequential Access - Write: 140MB/sec (SATA 6Gb/s) 140MB/sec (SATA 3Gb/s)
 
[citation][nom]JasonAkkerman[/nom]RAID 0 SSD's is a dangerous waste of money. SSD's real advantage are their IO ops, which isn't going to be enhanced by RAID. The real advantage to RAID is the throughput. In this case especially, the added throughput is not going to help the average gamer/enthusiast. It is surly not worth the risk of losing one of the drives and losing all your data.[/citation]

Actually you are correct as the internet will still suck and the few pot smokers in CA that has Fibre at bonded adsl2+ speeds 48Mb/s might be able to use it.
Running Zyxel VDSL2 Down 100Mb/s Up 100MB/s test here in Mexico at my holiday home to local ISP and getting 98% on avg 100Mb/s up speeds.

Raid0 will improve both speed and IO's especially for gamers or just buy 24GB ram and ramdrive it before starting a serious gaming session.

The idiot that has important info on a Raid0 needs to see a shrink as common sense dictates that you should keep important data away and disconnected from any pc hardware unless needed or backing up and then still have 2 or more cloned copy's offline in case something happens during that backup.
 
Yada yada yada... Hey, if you don't think you'd put SSDs, if you could afford multiples and have them in a raid0, that's your cup of tea... Any drive could fail, doesn't matter if it is a regular mechanical drive or an SSD... Not very long ago the same thing was said about any regular harddrive on the market, but now that most people can easily afford those, it's all kosher now... The probability of a hard drive failing in any raid array is higher than an SSD... I've had 4x 30gig OCZ vertexs and 2x 80gig Intel X25 raid 0 arrays in my builds for close to a year now and they haven't even budged... If you're scared you can always buy a cheap regular hard drive and back your files and image up... If you can't afford to do so, stop bashing folk who can or stop whinning...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom