1 big SSD vs 2x smaller SSD

K

Kryx

n00b
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
61
I'd really love to pick up the plextor deal on slick deals, but it is only for the 128gb version. I'd like to have 256gb.

What are the advantages of having 1 bigger drive vs 2 smaller drives? I have plenty of SATA slots.
Is it possible to software RAID them to act as one drive?
Should I just wait for the lower prices to maybe come? :(


Thanks
 
Honestly I have had slightly less issues with working with 1 SSD compared to 2 SSDs. Keep in mind with a raid 0, if either SSD fails you will lose all your data. So if you want to go this route make sure you get a really well quality SSD. Just my 2 cents :)
 
DJ Big T said:
Do you mind SanDisk? I would recommend 2x these in RAID: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171567

You'd save $20 over one 256gb Crucial M4, my gut says go for one 256gb Crucial M4, however.
Click to expand...
The plextor drive is better than the m4, but that isn't the debate here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels#RAID_0_failure_rate
There are some potential performance gains, but as an OS drive reliability is more important. So 1 drive is definitely better than raid 0.

What about having an OS drive and a gaming drive? Is that a smart idea?
 
Last edited:
What about having an OS drive and a gaming drive? Is that a smart idea?
Click to expand...

I would say yes to that, nothing wrong with it IMO.

EDIT: I thought I asked what is the sizes of those SSDs you have, guess I forgot.

So, what sizes are those SSDs?
 
Last edited:
I'm a little late to the game, but the the 256GB has 512MB dram cache while the 128GB only has 256GB. I went through the same dilemma of two 128GB vs one 256GB. Luckily the 256GB went on sale for ~$290 back when I was trying to figure this out.

Also
503x501pxll2d824111asss.png

17621476.png
 
I'm in the same boat as you -- I currently run a Kingson V100 64GB SSD -- by todays standards it's pretty old compared to the awesome stuff out now, but it still whoops the hell out of any mechanical HDD.

The only issue I've seen is that when putting SSD's in RAID0 you lose TRIM support via the OS.

ive heard drivers that support raid0 with the trim feature have been in the works, but I've been hearing this for 6 months too and never seen solid running proof.

I was tempted to pick up another V100, I just don't know how raid0 runs without trim in Win7 if it's a timebomb waiting to happen or what.

On the Backup part - use Acronis (love that software) and just have it set to autobackup the entire drive array (256GB) every 2 or 3 days when the computer is idle. That way if a drive fails you aren't really out much of anything data wise.
 
Kryx said:
The plextor drive is better than the m4, but that isn't the debate here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels#RAID_0_failure_rate
There are some potential performance gains, but as an OS drive reliability is more important. So 1 drive is definitely better than raid 0.

What about having an OS drive and a gaming drive? Is that a smart idea?
Click to expand...

Umm the Crucial M4 and Samsung 830 are considered on par with Intel's best consumer offerings (i.e. a tier above everything else in the consumer sphere). I'm not sure why you'd think the Sandisk is better than the M4.

OP, we are running RAID 10 with 4x 512GB M4's in a test DB server at work (i.e. we need very high I/O, but don't want to drop the coin for 10k/15k SAS or enterprise-level SSD's for a test box) and they have been running perfectly for ~1 year. Like I said above, as far as consumer level SSD's, Crucial's M4 and Samsung's 830 are a tier above everything else in terms of reliability.
 
Angry_Birds said:
Umm the Crucial M4 and Samsung 830 are considered on par with Intel's best consumer offerings (i.e. a tier above everything else in the consumer sphere). I'm not sure why you'd think the Sandisk is better than the M4.

OP, we are running RAID 10 with 4x 512GB M4's in a test DB server at work (i.e. we need very high I/O, but don't want to drop the coin for 10k/15k SAS or enterprise-level SSD's for a test box) and they have been running perfectly for ~1 year. Like I said above, as far as consumer level SSD's, Crucial's M4 and Samsung's 830 are a tier above everything else in terms of reliability.
Click to expand...

I see nothing about Sandisk in what you quoted. They mentioned Plextor, and I'll have to find it, but Plextor has reliability/return statistics similar to Intel.
 
MissJ84 said:
I'm a little late to the game, but the the 256GB has 512MB dram cache while the 128GB only has 256GB.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Makes it more compelling to wait for 256 to reach a reasonable price.

MissJ84 said:
I see nothing about Sandisk in what you quoted. They mentioned Plextor, and I'll have to find it, but Plextor has reliability/return statistics similar to Intel.
Click to expand...
This. Plus m4 is older and if you look at modern reviews it is outdone by Samsung 830, Plextor, Corsair Performance Pro, and others. Those are the 3 that I'm considering really.

Yes, I'm trying to decide between 256 vs 128. I think I'll wait on a 256 to drop. :(
 
Last edited:
Kryx said:
Thanks. Makes it more compelling to wait for 256 to reach a reasonable price.


This. Plus m4 is older and if you look at modern reviews it is outdone by Samsung 830, Plextor, Corsair Performance Pro, and others. Those are the 3 that I'm considering really.

Yes, I'm trying to decide between 256 vs 128. I think I'll wait on a 256 to drop. :(
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I did. Whichever of the three 256GB hit $300 or less back when I was looking, was what I planned on buying. Of course it turned out to be the M3, but I would not have hesitated to jump on the 830 or PP if they had slid down to that price at the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top