My Biggest Question?

[BDunkz]

Hey guys,

I just thought of this last night and I'm just wondering how many hdds' in raid 0 are required to equal an ssd in transfer speeds?

i would really like to know this please help,

 

BDunkz

[kb5zue]

Depends on the speed of the HDD's and the speed of the SSD.  Speed is relative, just like strength.  Chain is as strong as the weakest link and for speed, only as fast as the slowest item in the chain.

[BDunkz]

2 minutes ago, kb5zue said:

Depends on the speed of the HDD's and the speed of the SSD.  Speed is relative, just like strength.  Chain is as strong as the weakest link and for speed, only as fast as the slowest item in the chain.

Well a 54000rpm sata 3 hdd and a Samsung 850 evo

[spartaman64]

just two wd blacks in raid 0 should increase the sequential speeds to equal a sata ssd but unless you are just transferring large files an ssd will always be faster as raid 0 doesnt increase random read and write speeds by much.

[kb5zue]

2 minutes ago, BDunkz said:

Well a 54000rpm sata 3 hdd and a Samsung 850 evo

Good luck finding a 54,000 rpm sata 3 hdd.  They don't exist.

 

[spartaman64]

1 minute ago, kb5zue said:

Good luck finding a 54,000 rpm sata 3 hdd.  They don't exist.

 

he probably meant 5400 rpm lol

[kb5zue]

Just now, spartaman64 said:

he probably meant 5400 rpm lol

Yea, I think you're right.  With the way tech is going these days I had to google it just to make sure I didn't miss out on some advance made in the HDD field.  Got to admit though, 54,000 rpm is pretty dang fast.

 

[BDunkz]

15 minutes ago, kb5zue said:

Good luck finding a 54,000 rpm sata 3 hdd.  They don't exist.

 

Whoops

[dizmo]

Why? Just buy an SSD. It's not worth the extra failure points and longer boot times.

[BDunkz]

Just now, dizmo said:

Why? Just buy an SSD. It's not worth the extra failure points and longer boot times.

I have, I'm just wondering how many hdds = 1 ssd?

[dizmo]

1 minute ago, BDunkz said:

I have, I'm just wondering how many hdds = 1 ssd?

It doesn't work like that.

[BDunkz]

3 minutes ago, dizmo said:

It doesn't work like that.

In raid 0

[dizmo]

59 minutes ago, BDunkz said:

In raid 0

Yeah, it doesn't work like that. They'll have to spin up regardless, whereas an SSD doesn't. Overall, an SSD will always be faster.

[AshleyAshes]

1 hour ago, dizmo said:

Yeah, it doesn't work like that. They'll have to spin up regardless, whereas an SSD doesn't. Overall, an SSD will always be faster.

Seek time, also seek time.  All the spinning discs in the world don't bring you the seek time of an SSD.  You could stack drives up until the large file transfers were faster than that of an SSD, but in all other areas the HDDs would still lose.

 

Heck, I have an old OCZ Agility 3 SSD that only pulls like 220MB/s tops cause it's an old low end model.  They totally make consumer HDDs that can read as fast as that.  But WOW does Windows over start WAY faster on that SSD compared to an HDD cause it's seek and access times are still vastly outclassing any HDD.

[dizmo]

1 hour ago, AshleyAshes said:

Seek time, also seek time.  All the spinning discs in the world don't bring you the seek time of an SSD.  You could stack drives up until the large file transfers were faster than that of an SSD, but in all other areas the HDDs would still lose.

 

Heck, I have an old OCZ Agility 3 SSD that only pulls like 220MB/s tops cause it's an old low end model.  They totally make consumer HDDs that can read as fast as that.  But WOW does Windows over start WAY faster on that SSD compared to an HDD cause it's seek and access times are still vastly outclassing any HDD.

Ah yes! I couldn't think of the name, I was only half paying attention to my post (thanks, Masterchef). Cold boots are another area the SSD excels...not sure if that's also because of seek time though