NannerBeans
n00b
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2014
- Messages
- 13
Random question. What's faster? 4x RAID 0 ssds or a M.2 ssd? I'm running 4x raid 0 MX100s but my motherboard died and the new motherboard I'm getting has an M.2 slot. Is it worth it to go to M.2?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Random question. What's faster? 4x RAID 0 ssds or a M.2 ssd? I'm running 4x raid 0 MX100s but my motherboard died and the new motherboard I'm getting has an M.2 slot. Is it worth it to go to M.2?
It's hard to say what is faster when you did not describe your workload. I mean a single SATA SSD will be faster to boot versus either option.
DMI 2.0 is about PCIe 2.0 x4 i believe, so 2GB/s. I believe newer chipsets of Skylake platform have DMI 3.0 which is about the same as PCIe 3.0 x4 so ~4GB/s.The sata ports have a max speed (between all of them) and the chipset. There is a limit.
True, but you guys are forgetting that SSDs internally use RAID0 already. No one says do not get a 512GB SSD instead of 256GB SSD. No one says get a single core CPU instead of quad core CPU. No one says get a car with only one tire instead of four tires.Next, raid0 is bad, only one device failure you lose the lot so with your 4 ssd raid0 you have 4x the risk of failure.
If you already have them and the performance difference will be extremely minimal, why bother buying something different? Stick with what you have?!
Your argument on RAID 0 is invalid. Regardless of the internal RAID of the SSD, having 4 drives in RAID 0 is still 4 times the likelihood of a failure compared to 1 drive. Also in non-shock environments, aka a desktop or server, SSDs have about the same failure rate as HDDs. Also having RAID doesn't have any indication to someone backing up their data. If you don't care about your data, run RAID 0. If you care, either don't run RAID 0 or have regular backups.DMI 2.0 is about PCIe 2.0 x4 i believe, so 2GB/s. I believe newer chipsets of Skylake platform have DMI 3.0 which is about the same as PCIe 3.0 x4 so ~4GB/s.
The chipset SATA ports generally are the best SATA ports you are able to get.
True, but you guys are forgetting that SSDs internally use RAID0 already. No one says do not get a 512GB SSD instead of 256GB SSD. No one says get a single core CPU instead of quad core CPU. No one says get a car with only one tire instead of four tires.
With a reliable SSD the added risk of using multiple in RAID0 is very low. Besides, generally on an SSD you store less important data such as installed operating system, installed applications, installed games. Truly important data often is on mass storage (HDD).
Additionally, people using RAID0 could be more inclined to take care of proper backups. So in fact, using RAID0 might cause better protection for your data than those who use a single SSD. A single SSD is already a RAID0 of 16 NAND devices, basically. But once you start using host-level RAID0 people complain that RAID is risky. I think that is naive and hypocritical.
And while NVMe products like Samsung 950 512GB get benchmarked often, not everyone knows that the 256GB version has much lower write performance - almost half. This is due to RAID0 of course, since the 256GB utilises less parallellization due to interleaving ('RAID0').
I think multiple cheap SSDs in RAID0 is perfect for low-cost and high performance desktops. The added boot time of FakeRAID bootROM initialisation is one aspect to consider, though. But if you do not mind a few extra seconds boot time, the benefits are there while the price is next to zero. Because a 250GB SSD generally is about half the price of a 500GB SSD. Only the smallest capacity like 60/120 are usually more expensive relative to their capacity (i.e. 120GB is more than half the price of the 250GB version).
Just do not think that because you score 2000MB/s+ in your benchmarks, that the actual realistic benefit is very high. You can maybe 10% real-life benefit over a single standard SATA SSD.
[21CW]killerofall;1041961574 said:Your argument on RAID 0 is invalid. Regardless of the internal RAID of the SSD, having 4 drives in RAID 0 is still 4 times the likelihood of a failure compared to 1 drive. Also in non-shock environments, aka a desktop or server, SSDs have about the same failure rate as HDDs. Also having RAID doesn't have any indication to someone backing up their data. If you don't care about your data, run RAID 0. If you care, either don't run RAID 0 or have regular backups.
How much snappier can things get. M2 is technically better, 4k writes and all, but with games your load times are already low with any SSD and your CPU decompression rate begins to become the bottleneck... in my experience. Plus OP doesn't do anything that really needs past one SSD.
I used to do R0 when I was younger. Now I just use single SSDs of the 1TB variety. I honestly can't tell the difference. It would be hard not to get a M2 if doing a fresh build and prices were similar...