SSD Raid Help

[ad3x]

Hi, I would like to setup 3 ssd's in RAID0. The problem I am having is that I am very unfamiliar on how to do this when it comes down to the actual installation of the drives. For example, do I need a raid controller? How would I connect the ssd's? Much help would be appreciated.

 

[rolli59]

Most onboard SATA controllers support Raid, the question is how many connectors they have. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/259807-32-raid
I would advise against this though since the failure rate goes up with the number of drives which results in total DATA loss.

 

[apache_lives]

errrr you have one drive and it fails... you loose data, you have 2+ drives raid 0 and one drive dies you loose data..... whats the difference? MAKE SURE YOU BACKUP YOUR DATA is the moral of the story doesn't matter about single or multiple drives

as for SSD's in RAID0 you loose trim and with 3 you will probably run into the pcie/sb internal bandwidth maximum and wont see much performance gain past one decent drive anyhow

 

[rolli59]

errrr you have one drive and it fails... you loose data, you have 2+ drives raid 0 and one drive dies you loose data..... whats the difference? MAKE SURE YOU BACKUP YOUR DATA is the moral of the story doesn't matter about single or multiple drives

as for SSD's in RAID0 you loose trim and with 3 you will probably run into the pcie/sb internal bandwidth maximum and wont see much performance gain past one decent drive anyhow

Statistically 2 drives are more likely to fail than 1, let alone 3. I forgot to mention the trim as well that is another valid point against it.

 

[geofelt]

Hi, I would like to setup 3 ssd's in RAID0. The problem I am having is that I am very unfamiliar on how to do this when it comes down to the actual installation of the drives. For example, do I need a raid controller? How would I connect the ssd's? Much help would be appreciated.

If you have to ask this question, I suggest you rethink your desire to implement raid-0.

What do you wish to accomplish with raid-0?
Synthetic sequential benchmarks will look wonderful, but the reality is that you will see no difference in performance unless you have a very specific type app.

 

[ad3x]

Well I have decided to go with the single 512gb ssd. Another question I have is what ssd should I get. The Samsung 830 or the OCZ Vertex 4. I have heard good things about the Vertex 4 and it is cheaper than the Samsung 830 on amazon but I know that OCZ has had many problems in the past and that Samsung has an outstanding track record in reliability. Is the Vertex 4 just as reliable? Is it worth buying over the Samsung 830.

 

[dreadllokz]

Sry, RAID SSDs is just dumb and not reliable!

 

[geofelt]

Well I have decided to go with the single 512gb ssd. Another question I have is what ssd should I get. The Samsung 830 or the OCZ Vertex 4. I have heard good things about the Vertex 4 and it is cheaper than the Samsung 830 on amazon but I know that OCZ has had many problems in the past and that Samsung has an outstanding track record in reliability. Is the Vertex 4 just as reliable? Is it worth buying over the Samsung 830.

Yes, larger SSD's are a bit faster because they have more underlying nand chips that can be accessed in parallel. Sort of an internal raid-0 if you will.

Today, I recommend Samsung830 series, and Intel 520 or 330 series for reliability.
They make their own nand chips and can do better testing and design control.

All the modern SSD's will perform similarly in actual usage; you would be hard pressed to tell the difference without a synthetic benchmark.

 

[rolli59]

Vertex 4 does not have the sandforce issue like the previous OCZ drives since it is a different controller. It has a 5 year warranty like the Intel 520 which is in favor of it vs Samsungs 3 year.
Neither vertex4 or Intel 520 have been on the market long enough to proof their reliability but Intel's 320 has a extremely good record.
For cheaper and 2 more years of warranty I would go with the Vertex 4.