LSI CacheCade (SSD) -- smaller SSD the better?? really????

Cerulean

Cerulean

[H]F Junkie
2FA
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Messages
9,484
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sas-6gb-raid-controller,3028-18.html

Am I misreading this or what? 25GB SSD to serve as a hybrid cache (LSI's CacheCade) outperforms 840GB worth of SSD to serve as a hybrid cache.

*extremely confused*

While I wait for longer SAS-to-SATAx4 cables to come in, I am considering also purchasing a 512GB SSD, which I could either use as an SSD cache drive with my LSI 9260-8i and continue to use my existing 128GB SSD as OS drive, or flip flop and use 512GB as OS drive and 128GB as SSD cache drive. My storage system consists of five 2TB WD Enterprise HDDs that I will configure as a RAID6 once I get my longer cables. I'm thinking that if I use a 512GB as SSD cache for the RAID6, I'm thinking then the experience would basically be as though I'm running the whole system on SSD.. and then I saw this Toms Hardware review article showing that 25GB SSD significantly outperforms a larger configured SSD capacity as cache.
 
maybe the controller gets bottlenecked and cannot address the higher capacities so well?
compare with other controllers if possible might give a clearer picture?
 
When the test size goes over the cache size the performance becomes worse than without cache, I hope they've improved that.
 
That's definitely an odd result, and thankfully definitely not the case for my 71605Q
 
-Dragon- said:
That's definitely an odd result, and thankfully definitely not the case for my 71605Q
Click to expand...

What SSD are you using as a cache? MLC drives are cheap, but I'm worried that they will wear out too quickly. For example the new Sandisk Extreme is only rated at 80 TBW. Used as a cache for video editing, that 80 TB would go by quickly.

SuperSSpeed S301 might be good if they were available. These use SLC. Or the intel S3700 but they are $$$
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top