Questions on RAID 0 with two MX100s.

[Eleazar98]

So I'm very interested in using an array of two Crucial MX100 256 GB SSDs in RAID 0 for an upcoming build, but I have a few doubts and questions.

 

1. Will RAID 0 actually increase the chance that one of the drives will fail, or is it just half as reliable because there are two separate drives, and therefore two individual instances that have a normal chance of failure?

 

2. Will the performance increase of near 1000 MB/s read speed be really noticeable concerning game load times and the overall responsiveness of the OS?

 

3. If there is a very noticeable difference (which, from what I've heard, there is), is it worth the lowered reliability?

 

And if for any reason information on the build it will be used in is helpful, here it is: http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Eleazar98/saved/xvQMnQ

[Tedster]

1) AFAIK, just half as reliable.

2) You can supposedly tell the difference between 1 SSD and 2

3) Well, Linus runs 8 refurbished SSDs in RAID 0 (he doesn't keep anything of value on them) but they still work fine AFAIK.

[Speedbird]

So I'm very interested in using an array of two Crucial MX100 256 GB SSDs in RAID 0 for an upcoming build, but I have a few doubts and questions.

 

1. Will RAID 0 actually increase the chance that one of the drives will fail, or is it just half as reliable because there are two separate drives, and therefore two individual instances that have a normal chance of failure?

No, it will not increase the chance of a single drive failure.

2. Will the performance increase of near 1000 MB/s read speed be really noticeable concerning game load times and the overall responsiveness of the OS?

You will not get that performance. Trust me, I put 5 HDDs in RAID0 and didn't get even close to 350 MB/s

3. If there is a very noticeable difference (which, from what I've heard, there is), is it worth the lowered reliability?

Nope

And if for any reason information on the build it will be used in is helpful, here it is: http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Eleazar98/saved/xvQMnQ

Conclusion: don't do RAID0, unless it's a server.

[Eleazar98]

Conclusion: don't do RAID0, unless it's a server.

You seem to be misinformed. 2 Crucial MX100s in RAID 0 will absolutely, definitely give better than 800 MB/s read speed; most people get above 900. I don't know what makes you think that comparing HDDs in RAID to SSDs in RAID is a valid comparison in any context.

[Captain_WD]

So I'm very interested in using an array of two Crucial MX100 256 GB SSDs in RAID 0 for an upcoming build, but I have a few doubts and questions.

 

1. Will RAID 0 actually increase the chance that one of the drives will fail, or is it just half as reliable because there are two separate drives, and therefore two individual instances that have a normal chance of failure?

 

2. Will the performance increase of near 1000 MB/s read speed be really noticeable concerning game load times and the overall responsiveness of the OS?

 

3. If there is a very noticeable difference (which, from what I've heard, there is), is it worth the lowered reliability?

 

And if for any reason information on the build it will be used in is helpful, here it is: http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Eleazar98/saved/xvQMnQ

 

 

Hey Eleazar98,

 

1. The chance of a drive failing is not increased, just the chance of losing data due to the nature of RAID0. However, there is a chance of a drive dropping out of the array which is different from failing. The drive can be in perfectly good condition but fail to coordinate with the other drive and drop off the RAID, losing all data on the array. So in a way, the failure rate is the same, but the chance of losing data increases.

 

2. Regarding the speeds, games rely on storage only for their loading times and FPS and graphics will not be affected at all. Here's an example of the speed boost when using SSDs and HDDs: The jump in load times from HDD to SSD is like 10s to 1s. RAID 0 effectively (theoretically) halves the load time. So if you were to RAID 0 mechanical drives, it's 10s to 5s. You derive 5s of benefit. If you were to RAID 0 SSDs instead, its like 1s to 0.5s. You derive 0.5s of benefit. Just to demonstrate that striping SSDs is nowhere as beneficial compared to mechanical drives. 

 

3. This really depends if you can sacrifice the data on the RAID easily and if you really need the speed boost. This is a very individual decision which you have to see the chance of data loss versus the speed gain. 

 

Captain_WD.

[Dimwitted]

Add to the injury, there is overhead with a software raid. So the perceived benefit of faster access will be eaten up by the raid "doing stuff" instead of just working like if you only had one drive. IOW your machine goes from booting in 10s to 25s just because of the raid. Not worth it.

[Eleazar98]

 

Hey Eleazar98,

 

1. The chance of a drive failing is not increased, just the chance of losing data due to the nature of RAID0. However, there is a chance of a drive dropping out of the array which is different from failing. The drive can be in perfectly good condition but fail to coordinate with the other drive and drop off the RAID, losing all data on the array. So in a way, the failure rate is the same, but the chance of losing data increases.

 

2. Regarding the speeds, games rely on storage only for their loading times and FPS and graphics will not be affected at all. Here's an example of the speed boost when using SSDs and HDDs: The jump in load times from HDD to SSD is like 10s to 1s. RAID 0 effectively (theoretically) halves the load time. So if you were to RAID 0 mechanical drives, it's 10s to 5s. You derive 5s of benefit. If you were to RAID 0 SSDs instead, its like 1s to 0.5s. You derive 0.5s of benefit. Just to demonstrate that striping SSDs is nowhere as beneficial compared to mechanical drives. 

 

3. This really depends if you can sacrifice the data on the RAID easily and if you really need the speed boost. This is a very individual decision which you have to see the chance of data loss versus the speed gain. 

 

Captain_WD.

 

Thank you. Though that mostly reinforced what I already knew, now it's solid, and I'm not wondering. I'm really wanting to cut down load times in games and applications as much as possible, and since I will have a separate 4TB WD drive for important files I can't afford to lose, I think I will definitely use 2 MX100s in RAID 0.

[Captain_WD]

Thank you. Though that mostly reinforced what I already knew, now it's solid, and I'm not wondering. I'm really wanting to cut down load times in games and applications as much as possible, and since I will have a separate 4TB WD drive for important files I can't afford to lose, I think I will definitely use 2 MX100s in RAID 0.

 

Glad I could be of help  

 

AS I said, RAID0 from SSDs would have significantly lower effect compared to RAID0 from HDDs but still it would boost even more your loading times. I would consider getting rid of all unnecessary files and programs from the SSDs for even better performance (pagefile on the HDD, downloading paths to the HDD, etc.).

 

Captain_WD.