Using a RAID 0 Array Strictly for Gaming? Good/Bad?

[H_E_Xy]

After doing some research about the different raid arrays (0, 1, 5, 6, & 10) as well as the pros/cons, I was thinking of taking 2 cheaper SSDs and putting them into a RAID0 for dedicated storage of downloaded games. Given that if in the event a drive fails and the data is lost, I would only be required to buy a new drive and re download those game files.

Yes I could save them all onto a single SSD or HDD, but the interesting part would be having a faster and rather cheaper way of loading games without spending $250 on a Kingston Predator PCI-E 240GB SSD (which I do want, ). 

 

Adding onto this idea would be a larger HDD or SSHD that would act as a dedicated back up drive for the general system. Would this then drive back up the RAID array as well or not? Curious if it works that way.

 

Now the question is would this be a good idea to RAID0 2 SSDs for strictly gaming files? Or is the money for the PCI-E a better option in terms of performance, reliability, and "price in long run" Or is it still too early for a PCI-E.

 

Thanks for the info!

[dizmo]

Pointless. 2 drives in RAID 0 won't be any faster when it comes to loading game data. In fact, the next drive up (2x 128gb to 1x 250gb) is often faster.

All it does is introduce more points of possible failure.

[Captain_WD]

~snip~

 

Hey there H_E_Xy,

 

Games generally don't benefit much from the storage's performance. Only their loading times and autosaves are affected while FPS and graphics stay unchanged regardless of the storage configuration. Only a few games that load huge texture packs while in-game can benefit from faster storage (usually open-world games).

 

As @dizmo pointed out, the risk of data loss would be much higher than any benefits that you might get from configuring multiple drives in a RAID array jsut for gaming. I would simply stick to a larger HDD for most games in order to have more space for them and a big-enough SSD for the OS and the most demanding games and applications.

 

Captain_WD. 

[xTrekStorex]

personally I'd say PCIe is still to expensive. SSDs and RAID0 for games is not really gonna make much of a difference. I mean a WD Black just needs ~200% the time a SSD needs to load GTA5 and on Dota2 it actually is almost the exact same loadtime for both.

 

A RAID is just another possible point of failure in the system so I wouldnt build it if not necessary. Also if you dont want to lose data or have corrupted savegames in steamcloud (e.g. uploading during RAID-crash) you really need a backup for it which will just add to cost, powerconsumption, risk of failure and space requiered in the case.

 

So all in all not worth it imho. Sure RAID0 is always an interesting project but it rarely is of real benefit in the long run.

Also your RAID-controller needs to be decent otherwise a failure might occur more often than you might think. Also drives and controller should be optimized for it..

 

Games load a lot of small files which doesnt scale on bandwith but latency since the poll to the storage device is what takes most of the time with such small transfers. If you really want something faster than a WD Black get a SSHD.

[MG2R]

I've run two SSDs in RAID0 as my only storage in my daily driver gaming rig for years. I can honestly say it's not worth it one bit. Yes, your sequential IO will double, but running applications/OS is more about random IO than anything else, which won't really change at all. At the same time, you increase your chances of have data loss due to drive failures, and take up more room/ports/power.

 

One big SSD always trumps two small ones in RAID0.

[H_E_Xy]

 

 

 

 

With all you're helpful advice, it seems the best option would be to just avoid raiding SSDs and stick with a single normal setup. Although there were a few mentions about OS and random reading/writing, I already have everything set up and my OS on a 480GB intel 730 series for longevity. Was looking for a good option when it came to storing all my games, and it seems a nice SSD might not bring more performace to the table when it comes to loading games; however I play a lot of open world ones, and am thinking about using only SSDs for my daily activities and a single HDD for back up. This idea is just to have as less moving parts as possible.

 

And thank you for clearing up the lack of performance increase, and how negatives outweigh the positives. 

[dizmo]

With all you're helpful advice, it seems the best option would be to just avoid raiding SSDs and stick with a single normal setup. Although there were a few mentions about OS and random reading/writing, I already have everything set up and my OS on a 480GB intel 730 series for longevity. Was looking for a good option when it came to storing all my games, and it seems a nice SSD might not bring more performace to the table when it comes to loading games; however I play a lot of open world ones, and am thinking about using only SSDs for my daily activities and a single HDD for back up. This idea is just to have as less moving parts as possible.

 

And thank you for clearing up the lack of performance increase, and how negatives outweigh the positives. 

Having only SSD's isn't a terrible idea. A few of my friends have switched to all SSD storage. I plan to on my next build, except for an external HDD for mass storage.