SSD Help for RAID

[CmdrJeffSinclair]

I want a 1TB 850 EVO however I have 2.4TB of data I would want to put on it, but I can't afford 3 of them. How can I make this work with my 5TB Seagate Enterprise backup without constant swapping or other problems?

A part of me might just want to scrap an SSD for its speed since it's just a luxury and because I have sooooo much data I use every month and swapping in and out a couple TB of games and files seems kind of like it'd go against any benefits to an SSD.

My HDD can sustain 175MB/s and I was looking at 10K drives at 1TB also but they seem like they only get 200MB/s and wouldn't be worth the $200 price that my $200 HDD already cost.

What do I do?
I'd appreciate advice guys and thanks!

 

[Solandri]

If your motherboard supports Intel Smart Response Technology, you can get a SSD and set up part of its space as cache for the HDD.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/smart-response-technology.html

So if you got a 1TB SSD, you could set up ~920 GB for OS, programs, and most frequently played games. Then create an extra 64GB partition for SRT to use as cache for your HDD. That'll make your HDD work like a SSHD. The most frequently accessed files on the HDD get cached on the SSD so (after a couple initial reads) will be read at near-SSD speeds. Writes will probably go at HDD speeds, but fortunately games don't generate many writes. 64 GB is big enough that most of the slow-reading files on the HDD would eventually end up being cached.

 

[CmdrJeffSinclair]

If your motherboard supports Intel Smart Response Technology, you can get a SSD and set up part of its space as cache for the HDD.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/smart-response-technology.html

So if you got a 1TB SSD, you could set up ~920 GB for OS, programs, and most frequently played games. Then create an extra 64GB partition for SRT to use as cache for your HDD. That'll make your HDD work like a SSHD. The most frequently accessed files on the HDD get cached on the SSD so (after a couple initial reads) will be read at near-SSD speeds. Writes will probably go at HDD speeds, but fortunately games don't generate many writes. 64 GB is big enough that most of the slow-reading files on the HDD would eventually end up being cached.

This sounds good actually, but let's say I want this instead:
1) my 5TB Enterprise as main drive
2) a 240GB SSD for OS and Cache
?

This is more realistic I think for my needs. How can I achieve this? The price of savings would be great and if I could use 230GB as flash like a hybrid would, then would the HDD do most things at SSD speeds give or take? Where would I benefit and where would I see no difference (or worse, see poorer performance?)

Would there be any difference between a 240GB SSD as cache/os vs a 64GB or 128GB or 1TB?

 

[Solandri]

The maximum cache size Intel SRT allows is 64GB. Considering you will not be using it to cache OS files, 64GB is going to be plenty.

If you're going to get a SSD to do this, I highly recommend putting the OS on the SSD. I've used SSHDs before and while they (eventually) boot up as quickly as a SSD, they still behave like a HDD when it comes to mixed tasks and multitasking. e.g. If a virus scan starts running in the background, your computer will still slow to a crawl with a SSHD (or HDD with SSD cache). The HDD can only serve one read/write request at a time, and all other requests have to wait their turn.

SSDs are so fast they can service multiple read/write requests for small files faster than the computer can make them (filesystem limitations). I frequently run a virus scan and two malware scans simultaneously on my SSD, and can continue using my laptop like normal with only slight performance degradation. The laptop actually ends up being CPU-limited, not SSD-limited. On top of that, 128 GB SSDs are slower than 256+ GB SSDs. And 64 GB SSDs are even slower yet. So having your OS on a SSD will give you a lot more benefits than simply leaving the OS on the HDD and giving it a SSD cache.

If you really want to do this with just a 240 GB SSD, I'd suggest setting aside 64 GB of empty space, and using the rest of the SSD for the OS and non-game programs. (Keep in mind that you need to keep about 15%-25% of the SSD empty for best write performance.) In the 64GB empty space, you can start off with a 64 GB Intel RST cache partition. Use that a for a few weeks. Then try reducing it to 32 GB by deleting it, creating a dummy 32 GB partition, then having RST use the remaining space for cache. Use that for a few weeks. Then 16 GB or 8 GB cache.

Once you get a feel for how the different cache sizes affect games running off the HDD, you can decide how big to make your permanent cache partition. At that point, delete the Intel RST cache. Expand your OS partition into the empty space, leaving only as much space as you intend to use for cache. Then recreate the Intel RST cache of the desired size in the remaining free space.

 

[CmdrJeffSinclair]

The maximum cache size Intel SRT allows is 64GB. Considering you will not be using it to cache OS files, 64GB is going to be plenty.

If you're going to get a SSD to do this, I highly recommend putting the OS on the SSD. I've used SSHDs before and while they (eventually) boot up as quickly as a SSD, they still behave like a HDD when it comes to mixed tasks and multitasking. e.g. If a virus scan starts running in the background, your computer will still slow to a crawl with a SSHD (or HDD with SSD cache). The HDD can only serve one read/write request at a time, and all other requests have to wait their turn.

SSDs are so fast they can service multiple read/write requests for small files faster than the computer can make them (filesystem limitations). I frequently run a virus scan and two malware scans simultaneously on my SSD, and can continue using my laptop like normal with only slight performance degradation. The laptop actually ends up being CPU-limited, not SSD-limited. On top of that, 128 GB SSDs are slower than 256+ GB SSDs. And 64 GB SSDs are even slower yet. So having your OS on a SSD will give you a lot more benefits than simply leaving the OS on the HDD and giving it a SSD cache.

If you really want to do this with just a 240 GB SSD, I'd suggest setting aside 64 GB of empty space, and using the rest of the SSD for the OS and non-game programs. (Keep in mind that you need to keep about 15%-25% of the SSD empty for best write performance.) In the 64GB empty space, you can start off with a 64 GB Intel RST cache partition. Use that a for a few weeks. Then try reducing it to 32 GB by deleting it, creating a dummy 32 GB partition, then having RST use the remaining space for cache. Use that for a few weeks. Then 16 GB or 8 GB cache.

Once you get a feel for how the different cache sizes affect games running off the HDD, you can decide how big to make your permanent cache partition. At that point, delete the Intel RST cache. Expand your OS partition into the empty space, leaving only as much space as you intend to use for cache. Then recreate the Intel RST cache of the desired size in the remaining free space.

Your response was so excellent I have it pasted and saved into a Word document for my friend. I do have one question left (one left for now haha til another pops up).

This is a doozy but may be ingenius
1) Samsung Magician Software allows any user with 16GB of RAM to reserve 4GB of that for the SSD to achieve 1TB/s read/write speeds
2) If I set up a 1TB 850 EVO with the Samsung Magician Software (SMS) and used the 4GB 3000MHz DDR4 Corsair Vengeance LPX ram (CL 10)...
....3) could I use that 4GB of RAM reserved by SMS to insanely boost read/write/boot speeds to 1TB/s BETWEEN both the HDD and SSD and not just the data already on the SSD?

If so, I may be able to have my HDD cache ONTO the RAM+SSD via SMS like a very brief 1TB/s hybrid drive "burst speed". If my wording is not clear, I wrote some stuff below

-A hybrid drive uses the SSD cache to speed things up by storing common applications (you knew that)
-A hybrid drive has a "burst" read/write speed for 3-5 seconds then throttles to HDD speeds
-------With the above in mind, I was thinking of trying to combine that "burst" with the 850EVO as a cache combined with the SMS 4GB (in effect raising the Cache size and immensely increasing speed) for a short period

Would this work or is it impossible? KEEP IN MIND that SMS is automatically used as a Cache option, so no firmware would be necessary but it may not be able to combine the HDD data. It may only work with data already "on" the SSD thus when I transfer files from HDD to the SSD no performance will increase. This is a possibility

 

[Solandri]

I don't think Samsung Magician's RAPID mode and Intel SRT are compatible that way. RAPID will probably just speed up file access on the OS partition of the SSD. Intel SRT will work with the cache partition and HDD. I don't think they'd try to cache the same files (in fact I'd be worried about data corruption if they did).

RAPID is impressive in synthetic benchmarks. But in real world use cases its performance is all over the place (sometimes better, sometimes worse). Windows uses spare RAM to cache disk access as well, which may be masking (duplicating) a large part of the benefit of RAPID. It's just not optimized (i.e. which files get priority in the RAM cache) for SSDs like RAPID is. In other words, don't feel that you must have it turned on - you probably will not notice the difference.
http://www.thessdreview.com/software-2/samsung-magician-4-5-rapid-mode-2-1-testing/2/
http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_ssd_850_evo_ssd_review

 

[CmdrJeffSinclair]

I don't think Samsung Magician's RAPID mode and Intel SRT are compatible that way. RAPID will probably just speed up file access on the OS partition of the SSD. Intel SRT will work with the cache partition and HDD. I don't think they'd try to cache the same files (in fact I'd be worried about data corruption if they did).

RAPID is impressive in synthetic benchmarks. But in real world use cases its performance is all over the place (sometimes better, sometimes worse). Windows uses spare RAM to cache disk access as well, which may be masking (duplicating) a large part of the benefit of RAPID. It's just not optimized (i.e. which files get priority in the RAM cache) for SSDs like RAPID is. In other words, don't feel that you must have it turned on - you probably will not notice the difference.
http://www.thessdreview.com/software-2/samsung-magician-4-5-rapid-mode-2-1-testing/2/
http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_ssd_850_evo_ssd_review

Sadness. Well I guess it just means I have to make a decision on HDD alone or HDD with SSD and file swap since a RAID array I've been told is not possible between SSD+HDD. 3x 1TB SSD's would be equally nuts simply to load games faster.

I think I will get a small SSD around 120GB and use Intel SRT to cache on it and have my OS on it. I'll drop my common programs on it like Outlook, ie and Chrome, etc... I won't even bother to try to make it like a Hybrid since I swap between files so stinking much nothing would stay cached and stay put.

I appreciate such a great response. It was my assumption that since the two Softwares have nothing to do with each other that it might work on an "incidental" level but if RAPID has that many issues all by itself I'd be worried about data corruption as well. These softwares must be far more complicated than I realized

 

[Solandri]

I think I will get a small SSD around 120GB and use Intel SRT to cache on it and have my OS on it. I'll drop my common programs on it like Outlook, ie and Chrome, etc...

FYI, the 256GB SSDs tend to be faster than the 128GB SSDs. Typically the 256GB has twice as many lanes as the 128GB, It varies by brand. So be sure to check reviews for the 120 GB and 240 GB version of the SSD you're thinking of getting. They can have very different results even though they're the same brand and model name.

 

[CmdrJeffSinclair]

I think I will get a small SSD around 120GB and use Intel SRT to cache on it and have my OS on it. I'll drop my common programs on it like Outlook, ie and Chrome, etc...

FYI, the 256GB SSDs tend to be faster than the 128GB SSDs. Typically the 256GB has twice as many lanes as the 128GB, It varies by brand. So be sure to check reviews for the 120 GB and 240 GB version of the SSD you're thinking of getting. They can have very different results even though they're the same brand and model name.

I will admit I am unknowledgeable about SSD's except that Micron makes most of the memory for the many brands. I was thinking of getting the but whatever you suggest I will get

$56
120GB Kingston SSD NOW V300 Series SATA III

Performance
--Max Sequential Read
Up to 450 MBps
--Max Sequential Write
Up to 450 MBps
--4KB Random Read
Up to 85,000 IOPS
--4KB Random Write
Up to 55,000 IOPS
--MTBF
1,000,000 hours

 

[USAFRet]

That particular Kingston is one of the worst ones you could buy.
It is cheap for a reason.

 

[CmdrJeffSinclair]

That particular Kingston is one of the worst ones you could buy.
It is cheap for a reason.

hahahah that's awesome. I'm glad I am posting here so often. Would any of you make a suggestion for my sake? I'm definitely out of my element here on SSDs. Since the SSD itself would be for OS and basic programs like MS Outlook, IE and Chrome plus maybe a couple tiny games like >4GB the SSD doesn't have to be amazing just reliable. I do not plan on separating the OS .read/write of the temp files so I guess a SSD with a high write capacity woudl serve me better than one that's blazing fast. I don't think I could see the difference between 450MB/s and 550MB/s for files under 5GB on the SSD.

The SSD will also be a cache used with Intel SRT. I wanted the 250GB 850EVO but $100 is too high for what I will get out of it

 

[USAFRet]

850 EVO
Crucial MX200