Raid 0 not increasing write speed :(

[ColdFever]

Hey,
I have a problem in my raid 0 configuration.
I have 2 SSDs in raid 0. ADATA XPG SX910 and ADATA XPG SX900. Both are 256GB.
I'm using CrystalDiskMark to test (tried others but they're all pretty much the same). I'm not getting any improvements whatsoever in writing while getting a very good increase in reading.
If I change CrystalDiskMark to fill 0 or 1, the write speed also increases to almost double but there is no improvements in random fill.
I really don't understand the point of that. There is no point of using 0s only or 1s only while all data are being 0s and 1s together right ? ( Newbie here )
I think its worth mentioning that I never get close to what is advertised on the package of the SSD and that I have normal HDDs in raid 0 and they're working as they should.

Random filling

0 fill

1 fill

My specs are:

Motherboard: Maximus 6 hero Z87
Processor: I7-4770k no OC.
RAM: 4x8GB Kingston HyperX(32GB) @2133
SSD: ADATA XPG SX910 and ADATA XPG SX900
HDD: 2x 3TB Seagate Barracuda in raid 0
PSU: Seasonic M12II 850W Bronze

 

[Mattios]

Could come down to the SSDs being different models. RAID is only suggested for disks that are the same model.

 

[ColdFever]

Could come down to the SSDs being different models. RAID is only suggested for disks that are the same model.

They're the same controller, the 10 is for being cherry picked and extra 2 years warranty.

 

[Mattios]

That is the possible issue that springs to mind - different parts other than the controller may make a difference. Seeing as RAID works for another set of drives, it can't be the RAID controller/setup that is causing any issues, must be down to the drives. Do they both achieve expected speeds alone?

 

[Dereck47]

When you benchmark with CrystalDiskMark using the Random Fill setting CDM is using highly incompressible data to test Read/Write speeds. Highly incompressible data is the hardest type of data for any SSD to read or write.

When you benchmark with CrystalDiskMark using the 0-Fill or 1-Fill setting CDM is using highly compressible data to test Read/Write speeds. Highly compressible data is the easiest type of data for any SSD to read or write.

Advertised Read/Write speeds for the SX910 using AS-SSD, which uses incompressible data to test Read/Write speeds, are up to 490MB/s Read and 340MB/s Write.
http://www.adata.com/us/ssd/specification/183

Advertised Read/Write speeds for the SX900 using AS-SSD are up to 490MB/s Read and 340MB/s Write.
http://www.adata.com/en/ssd/specification/169

Your Random Fill benchmark shows that your are getting 93.2% of advertised Reads and 66.4% of advertised Writes.
Your 0-Fill benchmark shows that your are getting 98.8% of advertised Reads and 144% of advertised Writes.
Your 1-Fill benchmark shows that your are getting 98.0% of advertised Reads and 144% of advertised Writes.

Both of your SSDs have a SandForce controller in them, which work well with data that can be compressed, but isn't the best with incompressible data.

Update your RAID drivers to Intel's latest version and see if that helps with your Random Fill scores.
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/24779/Intel-Rapid-Storage-Technology-Intel-RST-RAID-Driver

 

[ColdFever]

That is the possible issue that springs to mind - different parts other than the controller may make a difference. Seeing as RAID works for another set of drives, it can't be the RAID controller/setup that is causing any issues, must be down to the drives. Do they both achieve expected speeds alone?

I really don't know according to Dereck47 single SSD has more than 100% write speed if I remember correctly. I'm so confused :S

When you benchmark with CrystalDiskMark using the Random Fill setting CDM is using highly incompressible data to test Read/Write speeds. Highly incompressible data is the hardest type of data for any SSD to read or write.

When you benchmark with CrystalDiskMark using the 0-Fill or 1-Fill setting CDM is using highly compressible data to test Read/Write speeds. Highly compressible data is the easiest type of data for any SSD to read or write.

Advertised Read/Write speeds for the SX910 using AS-SSD, which uses incompressible data to test Read/Write speeds, are up to 490MB/s Read and 340MB/s Write.
http://www.adata.com/us/ssd/specification/183

Advertised Read/Write speeds for the SX900 using AS-SSD are up to 490MB/s Read and 340MB/s Write.
http://www.adata.com/en/ssd/specification/169

Your Random Fill benchmark shows that your are getting 93.2% of advertised Reads and 66.4% of advertised Writes.
Your 0-Fill benchmark shows that your are getting 98.8% of advertised Reads and 144% of advertised Writes.
Your 1-Fill benchmark shows that your are getting 98.0% of advertised Reads and 144% of advertised Writes.

Both of your SSDs have a SandForce controller in them, which work well with data that can be compressed, but isn't the best with incompressible data.

Update your RAID drivers to Intel's latest version and see if that helps with your Random Fill scores.
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/24779/Intel-Rapid-Storage-Technology-Intel-RST-RAID-Driver

Thanks for clearing some stuff up. I have the Intel driver up to date. Any other suggestion ?

 

[Dereck47]

Not too much else you can do other than making sure that your motherboard BIOS is on its latest version, and your SSD's firmware is on its latest version.

Are you having any real-world performance problems? Unless you're spending the majority of your time working with music (wav) files, or video (avi) files, which cannot be compressed, your real-world performance should be really good with 2 SSDs in RAID-0.

 

[alpha27]

looks about right not far from full speed, I got 2 x lite-on 120gb ssd's in raid 0, they are slightly different as in firmware versions and get 1 gbps w/r, for u getn over 900 mbps is still dam quick mate.

 

[ColdFever]

Thanks alot everyone.