Raid ssd vs hdd

Solution
And maths says it's 50% failure rate as I've had failures and you haven't.... Still want to go with maths.

in the right place, with the right backup mechanisms in place raid0 had it's uses, now it has fewer benefits. So you can move 2GB in under a second, where to? something else that can can accept 2GB in under a second? certainly not off your machine.
Hey there, DMG5760.

Depends on the RAID you are talking about. First I think that some options such as fast boot or rapid mode probably don't work with the SSDs being in a RAID setup, but I'm not 100% sure about that. Those SSDs in RAID 0 wouldn't get a justified performance boost as those drives have speeds of more than 500MB/s, so that may be one of the reasons - it's just a bit pointless, because basically the only thing you're adding is the opportunity to lose your data if one of the drives fails with very little to show in terms of speed increase when transferring files and you still have the lightning fast access time.
Basically RAID 1 for example is a whole different story if you want to mirror your drive.

Hope that helps.
Boogieman_WD
 
Here is where ya'all got it wrong. SSDs today are extremely reliable. I've had RAID 0s with both various hdds and SSDs running for over 6 years in four machines and not one failure. If you lose one drive or half of a RAID 0 what are the real costs of replacement of a failed drive. One always has a good back up. Speculation and fears vs reality.
W.P.
 
Well using the 3x drives what would be the best option and is a raid on the motherboard that bad or is it fign I'm running a Asus x99 deluxe and what would be a cheep raid card for future saving
 
Hardware RAID is different than a software RAID. Use the mobo not the OS. I have a X99A/3.1 ASUS board and it works flawlessly. The horses mouth here not what someone just says. Good luck.
W.P.
 
Boogoeman_WD is correct using SSD in raid 0 you wont get much benefits if you are using SATA interface (for M.2 on theory the performance should be better ). There is NAS systems whit SSD not sure how much MB have more then one M.2 port. If you use the SSD in raid 1 configuration then you want more safety then performance, if that is the case go for hybrid HHD+SSD or Raptor HDD. If SSD fail is way harder to recover data from it.
 
Buy the way this computer is for gaming so security isn't the most important but I am planning on getting some hdd and setting them as a mass storage array any tips on doing that I was thinking a separate computer and having it as a server
 


That's one horse, one mouth, you may have been lucky with drives, environmental conditions, usage patterns. Just because one person has had no issues, doesn't mean everyone won't.

I had 2x 500GB RE4's in raid1, kept dropping out, tried in raid0, oddly more stable.
 
And maths says it's 50% failure rate as I've had failures and you haven't.... Still want to go with maths.

in the right place, with the right backup mechanisms in place raid0 had it's uses, now it has fewer benefits. So you can move 2GB in under a second, where to? something else that can can accept 2GB in under a second? certainly not off your machine.
 
Solution
Actually @13thmonkey has correctly stated that the SATA cap is not determined by the controller, but by the SATA ports, thus you'll be able to get highers speeds than 600MB/s. But still the lack of redundancy is not justified in my opinion. I've always been in favor of 2 drives instead of one if there are enough available ports.

Sorry for the mistake on my part.
 


I see that you have decided that this thread has gone off topic, it's actually quite relevant as to whether the speed actually delivers you anything, and shuffling it around inside a machine is kind of pointless as you can generally do what you want where the data is sat, moving it to a different machine is useful. So how do you get SSD speeds (raided or otherwise) to be useful over network speeds?
 


Which is surely network dependent, did the OP state his setup? LBFO etc?