NVMe Raid-0 Advice - Thanks in advance

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,644
Have a new build and wanting to take the performance to the next level.

10900K, 2080 Ti, 16GB 4400mhz.

I have 2 x 512 NVMe 3200MB/s read / 1800MB/s write drives I'm gonna Raid-0.

What are the advantages / disadvantages to 2 x 1TB NVMe drivers other than increased write speed if I were to Raid-0 and then partition them?

Concerned with the partitioning of a Raid-0 array.

Thinking, 2 x 512 partitions and 1 x 1TB partition. I do not like huge boot drivers, the 2nd 512 I would use for my important system files / tweeks, etc. the 1TB for games.

I'm gonna image the boot drive and put that file on the 2nd 512 partition.

I want to make sure I won't run into any issues in terms of limiting myself in ways I am not currently aware of.

Appreciate any advice or thoughts.

Yes, i am aware SSD Raid-0- performance is limited but not when it comes to RAW read / write.
 

Blue Fox

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
11,785
Your sequential performance would go up, but at the expense of latency. You will see no real benefit. I would just get a single 2TB drive.
 

SixFootDuo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Messages
5,644
I want any advantage I can get in terms of performance. I'm more than happy with raw read performance.

I had a lot of people tell me I would not see any difference in going to NVMe from SATA, and I did, massive amount of difference.

Some games, I see very little difference.

I think there is a mindset out there and its very common place that, small gains in performance are not worth the added cost and a majority of people do not bother or chase it. And I can understand that.

I don't see the point in huge boot drives. It hasn't, won't and doesn't make sense to me to be honest.

When you speak of latency, are we talking split microseconds here?

I'm honestly trying to understand more about Raid0 and NVMe.

I'm hear A LOT of mixed messages here. Linus Tech Tips says it is absolutely worth doing. You get some benefits and some you don't like tiny files.

I'm building a new dream machine so I don't mind the added cost to chase performance here and there within reason.
 

Maxx

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
1,621
It's a more complicated question than it appears. For example, what stripe size would you use? Most typically you stripe at 64 or 128KB but for SSDs the ideal size would be 4KB, especially if you are running 4Kn. This increases overhead since you're effectively running software RAID. And yes of course latency increases at lower QD. It is worthwhile in some cases, I currently stripe 2x1TB WD SN750s for example, but I use that as a workspace and those drives have a conservative SLC cache design with good steady state performance. If you're tossing two consumer drives together with large SLC caches and just playing games, you're really not getting any benefit except logistically as a single volume.
 

Tsumi

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
13,351
You're trading low queue depth performance for sequential performance. Most games and OS usage are low queue depth, with the occasional game loading large maps demanding sequential. Take your pick.
 
Top