RAID0 vs Larger Capacity Higher End Single SSD

[gcefaloni]

Hi guys,

My main question pertains to what would make most sense for the same money when it comes to the different options one can do about SSD purchases. I was wondering if it would be more logical to set up a RAID0 with 2 normal (not Deluxe) MKNSSDCR120GB rather than going with the single MKNSSDCR240GB-DX.. The two normal 120gb ones are 119$ each which would equal approximately the price of the deluxe 240gb... but I understand that a RAID0 set up offers much better performance than a single SSD, even if one of higher capacity.

What would you guys suggest?

Thanks a lot in advance!

 

[foscooter]

I've been there.

I just got rid of RAID 0, and got a single larger SSD. Can't even notice.\

Yes, benchmarks are lower, but the PC boots up in about the same time, and still is super responsive.

SSD scale as drive sizes get larger. A 240GB drive will perform about twice as well as a 120G, which will perform twice as well as a 60GB SSD.

Lots of people will tell you NOT to RAID. I'm not one of them. However, you do lose TRIM support in a RAID array, an important part to SSDs.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

The general consensus is purchase the single largest capacity drive you can afford. Modern ssd's are fast. Unless you are doing some sort of highly specialized professional work an ssd RAID array won't make a difference.

 

[WyomingKnott]

I agree with both of the above. Here's my reference link on the topic: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/display/kigston-hyperx-ssd-raid0_7.html#sect0

 

[RetiredChief]

From one who likes raid0 - To clarify, I like and used raid0 for HDDs and when usage is often with very large files stuctures that can really benifit from High Sequencial performand - NO I do NOT RECOMMEND raid0 for SSD.

Must remember the SSDs are already a raid0 device (for the larger capacities) internally. so what you are doing is raid0 ing a raid zero configuration using two different raid0 controllers.

Summary:
.. Raid0 improves mostly the Sequencial performance - The least important paramer for a OS + Program drive. Geat for Storage drive when primary usage is with LARGE 1 gig and 40 gig files such as DVD and Bluray video files, Large CAD/Cam Drawing files, Large complex spreadsheets, and often working with large jpeg/bitmap photos. BUT THESE are normally place on a HDD.
.. Raid0 improves slightly on small file 4K random, But NOT as much as the improvement generally obtained by using a larger SSD. The Random 4K performance is what is the MOST important for an OS + Program drive.
.. You LOSE Trim. While the newer SSDs have a better internal CG (Garbage collector), it works one He** of a lot better when used in conjuction of Trim.

And he said "let there be Light" So beween the above posts and mine you can now make a "informed" choice - reject the Raid0 and go with the larger SSD. And if you do work with the large file stucture go ahead and raid0 a pair of HDDs, Just remember (A) use HDDs that allow for Raid0 (some HDDs are not intended for Raid0) and (B) Do backups, but then that should be done even if not using raid0.

 

[gcefaloni]

Best answer selected by gcefaloni.

 

[gcefaloni]

Thank you very much for your comments guys, helped me understand a bit more the details of RAID0 performance increase for new SSDs

 

[alvine]

raid 0 on regular hard drives is more cost effective. i have two 500gb drives in raid 0 giving me 931gb of space. find me a ssd that size for $220 (thats how much i paid for both of my drives)

 

[gcefaloni]

raid 0 on regular hard drives is more cost effective. i have two 500gb drives in raid 0 giving me 931gb of space. find me a ssd that size for $220 (thats how much i paid for both of my drives)

That's a bad comparison though, because I really doubt your 2 RAID0 HDD's have the same overall performance as a SSD that would go for the same price.. Let's say the Mushkin Enhanced Chronos 240GB (goes for 228$) or the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe (for 239$).

 

[alvine]

my windows boots to the desktop two seconds slower than my friends similar system with an ssd
i know thats not the best comparison but i like having more space and some speed benefit than a ssd

 

[RetiredChief]

Alvin - Raid0 on a HDD ONLY improves on Sequencial performance. A typical Raid0 on HDDs Does NOT improve Access time, nor the random 4 K. HDDs - typicall access time is around 12 -> 12.6 mSec as opposed to a SSDs 0.1 mSec.

There is a way to improve the access time and that is to use what is called short stroke, However you do lose size. My pair of WD 640's using Raid0 with short stroke cut access time from 12.6 mSec to about 9.5 mSec.