SSD's in raid performance question.

[SpagettiNinja]

Hey, so, i was talking to my friend who builds computers, and he told me that, say, two 256 GB SSD's in raid would give a much faster performance than a single 512 GB. Is there any truth in this?

[79wjd]

In raid 0, yes (assuming the two drives are comparable in the first place -- some shitty 5 year old ssds in raid 0 probably won't be faster than a single modern ssd) 

[Jobbe03]

Yep. Raid 0 will give you a performance boost, but just remember; if one drive fails, the other loses it's data aswell (still works)

[DavidTheWin]

They would give better performance, however it wouldn't really translate into a very different user experience to make running raid0 SSDs worth the risk to me, unless you had regular backups and bought very good SSDs initially.

[DavidTheWin]

Yep. Raid 0 will give you a performance boost, but just remember; if one drive fails, both do.

 

That's slightly misleading. If one drive fails the other drive is still physically fine and able to be used further, but the data on it is unusable. Not quite the same thing as "failing".

[ZetZet]

Yep. Raid 0 will give you a performance boost, but just remember; if one drive fails, both do.

Kinda missleading, they don't both fail you just lose all the data. 

[Jobbe03]

That's slightly misleading. If one drive fails the other drive is still physically fine and able to be used further, but the data on it is unusable. Not quite the same thing as "failing".

 

Kinda missleading, they don't both fail you just lose all the data. 

Yep, worded it wrong

 

edited.

[SpagettiNinja]

Yep. Raid 0 will give you a performance boost, but just remember; if one drive fails, the other loses it's data aswell (still works)

They would give better performance, however it wouldn't really translate into a very different user experience to make running raid0 SSDs worth the risk to me, unless you had regular backups and bought very good SSDs initially.

Kinda missleading, they don't both fail you just lose all the data. 

 

What would you guys recommend doing if the price is virtually the same? Get two 256 GB SSD's in raid 0, or a single 512 GB?

[Jobbe03]

What would you guys recommend doing if the price is virtually the same? Get two 256 GB SSD's in raid 0, or a single 512 GB?

2x in Raid 0 for sure.

[ZetZet]

What would you guys recommend doing if the price is virtually the same? Get two 256 GB SSD's in raid 0, or a single 512 GB?

If you do not care about the data you have on there get the raid 0. If one fails you get to keep another one so it actually could translate to benefit. But if you will keep important stuff on that computer then one is more reliable IN THEORY.

[samcool55]

Just get a 512GB. Saves a sata slot and 1 ssd is fast enough. Also no raid means no raid control that needs to boot. So the boot time will be sort of the same.

[SpagettiNinja]

If you do not care about the data you have on there get the raid 0. If one fails you get to keep another one so it actually could translate to benefit. But if you will keep important stuff on that computer then one is more reliable IN THEORY.

 

I'll most likely have the OS and perhaps some game launchers (As in Steam, Origin, the likes). The chance of as SSD failing should be very low in the first place, so should i rather go with 256 GB x2 for faster performance?

[Deli]

Will the OS have trim for the SSDs in raid mode?

[DirkW]

RAID0 usually only helps with sequential performance (as can be impressively demonstrated in benchmarks). In most day-to-day normal use scenarios (what you, as a user will really see and feel), the gain is actually minimal, so personally I'd avoid the hassle of RAID0 and take a single 512 GB drive instead.

[m_tieu]

What would you guys recommend doing if the price is virtually the same? Get two 256 GB SSD's in raid 0, or a single 512 GB?

I definitely recommend going with a single 512 now and then getting another one in the future if you need more storage. The performance gains of raid 0 doesn't outweigh the potential drawbacks like having to deal with daily backups or loss of critical data unless you plan on taking the necessary precautions anyways.

[Jgeorge610]

I'll most likely have the OS and perhaps some game launchers (As in Steam, Origin, the likes). The chance of as SSD failing should be very low in the first place, so should i rather go with 256 GB x2 for faster performance?

SSD's nowadays have a very small chance of failing as they have evolved over the years, 2 x 256gb is ur best option

[SkilledRebuilds]

I tried it with my 2x 256GB 840Pro's (Initially to combine them, not for speed)

The SPEED was REAL, but such a WASTE.

1007MB/s & 958MB/s Read&Write

 

 

There is ZERO extra performance in Windows loading time, or within it's operation, it may even take longer to load, as the BIOS still loads the Raid functions at Bios Boot.

It does not get extra responsive,..also there is Zero extra performance loading 90% of Games. (Some games may, typical games do not(tested AAA + other titles myself)

 

Performance benefits - File Scanning/Searching type stuff IS accelerated like.....Origin/Steam Game Scanning & Repairs

 

 

Waste of time IMO unless using a scratch disk or professional application (Temp File Read & Writes)

 

^Generalized Gamers Viewpoint, I'm sure video/photo professionals have their reasons, but Gamers....zero benefit to 90% of things you do.

[Matacks]

Possible to go crazy and use two 512GB in raid? Do that! Or maybe one 250GB ssd and another 512GB ssd.. I just want Moar ssd!!

I dunno. I have used separate systems with SSDs, one with

Raid 0 and another just single SSDs.. I think I noticed the raid 0 one being faster when doing something like a spyware scan.. this is handy.. but I don't have any benchmarks to really back up that statement.