Samsung SSD's in RAID 0

[I_G]

4 X Samsung 32GB SSD in Intel ICH9R RAID 0 write cache enabled:

http://img369.imageshack.us/img369/9357/matrixraidbe4.jpg


http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/5830/ssd634xm2.jpg


http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/1581/hdtunebenchmarkintelraiqi6.png

[Xcel]

nice, what's the price of one of those?

[I_G]

$399, $100 more than a Velociraptor.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147053

[dinos22]

that's really great

have you used it much for your OS
how does it feel like....can you see the responsiveness even in trivial tasks

what about some HDD intense programs....

great results so far

[1Tanker]

Nice performance.:) I'm wondering why it starts out slower then picks up...then drops off at the end. SSD's usually have a somewhat even performance..from start to finish, and aren't slower at the ends like a magnetic drive. :confused:

[I_G]

that's really great

have you used it much for your OS
how does it feel like....can you see the responsiveness even in trivial tasks

what about some HDD intense programs....

great results so far

Yes, I use the Intel Matrix RAID so one array is my 24/7 work machine and the other array I use for benchmarking. I was previously using 6 150GB Raptors in RAID 0.

Most tasks are noticeably faster. The array defrags in about 20 - 30 seconds. The machine boots up about 12 -15% quicker.

The only thing I do that would be disk-intensive is image cloning, which if going from the RAID to a single SSD, or vice versa, it takes about 90 seconds to read and write a 60GB driver image.

[I_G]

Nice performance.:) I'm wondering why it starts out slower then picks up...then drops off at the end. SSD's usually have a somewhat even performance..from start to finish, and aren't slower at the ends like a magnetic drive. :confused:

At this point I'm guessing it's the RAID controller. The pattern is very consistent and turning the write cache on or off has no effect. I used to also get some strange patterns with the six Raptors.

[dinos22]

Yes, I use the Intel Matrix RAID so one array is my 24/7 work machine and the other array I use for benchmarking. I was previously using 6 150GB Raptors in RAID 0.

Most tasks are noticeably faster. The array defrags in about 20 - 30 seconds. The machine boots up about 12 -15% quicker.

The only thing I do that would be disk-intensive is image cloning, which if going from the RAID to a single SSD, or vice versa, it takes about 90 seconds to read and write a 60GB driver image.
how does image cloning performance compare to normal drives

[eva2000]

very nice.. hopefully next week i'll have 4x32GB OCZ SSD 120-140/90 read/write ones from local Aussie retailer

you plan to try with hardware raid controllers too or just onboard ICH9R ?

[Movieman]

That's $1600.00 for an effective 128 gig drive.
I got to pass at this point but nice numbers!:up:

[Brother Esau]

To Rich for my blood.

[WiZARD_hun]

Most tasks are noticeably faster. The array defrags in about 20 - 30 seconds. The machine boots up about 12 -15% quicker.

defrag is the worst thing you can do with a SSD...

[1Tanker]

defrag is the worst thing you can do with a SSD...I didn't think SSD's need defrag. :confused:

[tiro_uspsss]

defrag is the worst thing you can do with a SSD...

:confused: please explain? :yepp:


:up:

[bowman]

The controller of an SSD deliberately 'fragments' the drive when writing to even out the wear cycles as much as possible, hindering that one chip dies with many other perfectly good chips still alive but unable to be used.

I guess in theory defragmenting it would force the controller to not do that, but I'd think it would be smart enough to not actually defrag the drive.

[tiro_uspsss]

The controller of an SSD deliberately 'fragments' the drive when writing to even out the wear cycles as much as possible, hindering that one chip dies with many other perfectly good chips still alive but unable to be used.

I guess in theory defragmenting it would force the controller to not do that, but I'd think it would be smart enough to not actually defrag the drive.

wow! I never knew that! thats pretty darn interesting! thank u muchly for sharing! :toast: :wave:

[Xcel]

I haven't read much about defragmenting SSDs but OCZ for instance doesn't recommend it on their new core SSDs.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Solid State Drives DO NOT require defragmentation.It may decrease the lifespan of the drive.

[eva2000]

That's $1600.00 for an effective 128 gig drive.
I got to pass at this point but nice numbers!:up:

how you calculate that.. in OZ 32GB OCZ Core SSD 2.5" retails for AUD$219/each so = AUD$876 (~US$850) and 64GB and 128GB OCZ SSD are AUD$339 and $599 respectively http://i4memory.com/f59/ocz-core-ssd-2-5-arrive-australia-7785/ :)

Puts the 64GB version around same price as 300GB WD raptor for Australian prices.

[Xcel]

I'm tempted to go 2x32GB OCZ Core for my OS :D (available for preorder here 172€ each)

[bowman]

I'm waiting it out till Intel's 80GB drives this fall - perhaps something to accompany the Nehalem freshness. :)

http://www.hothardware.com/News/Intel_Nehalem_Processor_and_SSD_Sneak_Peek/
Also in the system were a pair of 80GB Intel-built solid state drives running in a RAID 0 configuration. After seeing these drives in action and talking with representatives from Intel, we now know why Intel is excited to bring these drives to market. The combination of an Intel designed SATA II controller with high speed flash has resulted in a wicked-fast SSD. Unfortunately, again, we were asked not to disclose benchmark scores, but we can say the sustained transfer speeds were significantly higher than anything else we have seen to date.

[I_G]

I didn't think SSD's need defrag. :confused:

They don't, but I just had to see how fast it would be.

And with a MTBF of 228 years I figured once or twice wouldn't hurt...

[I_G]

how does image cloning performance compare to normal drives

Four 150GB Raptor array - 60GB partition- 3+ minutes; 500GB partition 4+ minutes.

Six 32GB SSD's - 60GB partition - 45 seconds; 118GB partition - 90 seconds.

[dinos22]

Four 150GB Raptor array - 60GB partition- 3+ minutes; 500GB partition 4+ minutes.

Six 32GB SSD's - 60GB partition - 45 seconds; 118GB partition - 90 seconds.

wow i'd become religious if they could invent some cool SSD religion :D

this is very cool indeed
i'll definitely get into some SSD action when i do my next update on 24/7 system

[xtclocker]

Wow, that's is really fast!! beautiful drives

[gillll]

any difference between 2 and 4 drives ?

[Jim Morbid]

Nice performance but going to stick to high cache normal drives :p

JM

[I_G]

...
you plan to try with hardware raid controllers too or just onboard ICH9R ?


Just the onboard ICH9R. Sure would be fun to bench them with an Areca controller, though...

[berk]

Really impressive results,is the Areca a dedicated SSD RAID controller or SSD/SATA?

[Buckeye]

Yeah you should really look into a ARC-1231ML to run with those. I like those drives tho. I am interested in how well they will hold up tho. I am using MTRON PROs which they claim are rated for server operation and a 5 year warranty.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=185677

Here is my setup in Raid 0

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/4936/hdtachareca32k8xmtronprfc4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

After a major crash on my main working rig last week and found myself unprepared backup wise, Ouch ! Didn’t turn out that bad :) I am not sure what actually happened with the rig, could be hardware or something like that. I am going through all the equipment on a test bench to try and figure that out atm.

But I needed a machine up and running for work. So the new rig which has been waiting for cooling and has been running in stock setup was commissioned as the new work/play rig. It has no OC yet.

This machine is loaded with all my work apps, anti-virus (which was turned off for tests), the whole banana.

The SSD Raid was set to Raid 5 config for safety, I felt the need to do that after last weekend’s computer crash. I did take a hit on bandwidth but I have extra safety now, but to tell you the truth I can hardly notice any performance hit.

All in all it is running Xtremely well and very fast. Going from a Raid 0 and Vista boot time which was ~8-10 seconds, and now in Raid 5 and all apps loaded it takes about ~12 seconds. So still a very good boot time. Apps like Photoshop, Outlook, Paperport etc all load almost instant. I am very happy with this setup so far, I just need cooling to OC this beast.

First Raid benching

PCMark Vantage scored a 37057 on HDD Test Suite.

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/681/hdtachtz5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/2521/hdtuneqm3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[1Tanker]

Sorry to hear about your data loss Buckeye.:down: Question... were you one of the "I like RAID0..one of my drives won't die" type guys? I don't mean this in a disrespectful way... but many people think they're safe in RAID0, then get a wake-up call...such as your crash, etc. It sounds like you're gonna stick with RAID5 and enjoy a little more piece of mind? I'm just wondering, i've never used RAID.. and am getting very interested.. yet i've always been leery of RAID0 due to the doubled chance of data-loss vs. non-RAID. From your results, RAID5 sounds quite enticing though. :)

[Buckeye]

The Raid I was running was just 2x 74GB Raptors with OS and programs on it. I had "My Documents" and main data assigned to a second and third HD. So no real data lost. But having to reinstall everything on a new rig and get all that stuff up and running right in the middle of a very heavy work weekend was not fun hehe.

After I put the pieces of the old main work rig on my Dimas table to trouble shoot I found it was memory failure, not HD's. At the time I did not know what the problems was tho.

But still for a machine I use so much for work with I decided that the SSD Raid should go into Raid 5 config and I now run Acronis on it which I like much better than my WHS.

But one main thing I must say about Raids, or at least my Raid setup.

If my new rig goes down, for just about any hardware failure, I can take out the ARC-1231ML with SSD's and install it in another new or rebulit computer and still use that Raid. <correct me if I am wrong here>

I did take a very strong look at Raid 0 tho., I think it's great for gaming rig and all that jaz, but for anything else take a very strong look at how you back things up and be ready for trouble.

I had thought that my Raptor Raid 0 was running pretty good, for that matter the whole machine was. But stuff happens thats for sure. For games I would have gone np, but for work it was painful. Even tho my problem turned out to not be with my Raptors, it very easly could have been.

And shoot the SSD's still perform Xtremely well even in Raid 5

[crosshairs]

Man, thats some serious speed

[Lestat]

ok nice benchmarks but how about lets start talking about REAL PERFORMANCE.

windows load time
application load time
large file open time (such as very large raw files in photoshop)
game loading
VANTAGE LOADING
other various hard drive intensive things.
something like, open IE or firefix, open about 15-20 tabs (various websites) close it, but tell it to reopen tabs next time you start the program. firefox is dog for multiple tabs reopening.
large picture thumbnail viewing. (folder full of highres pictures, change view to thumbnail and see how long it takes compared to a regular drive)

[Buckeye]

Here is a PCMark Vantage of my setup