• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

SSD RAID or single SSD

C

Centurion666

n00b
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
28
Hi all, was wondering whats better in terms of real life performance and longevity. Two SSD's in raid 0 for 460GB or a single 480GB/512GB SSD or is it better to have two single SSDs 240/240GB and put games on them instead of combing them?
 
longetivity for your SSDs -> raid
longetivity for your data -> single SSD
 
Generally speaking single is the way to go, especially if you pick an SSD that can saturate the bus.
 
If you have to ask, it means you better go single.
 
SSDs in RAID 0 gives you better sequential reads at the cost of a significant reduction in random 4K read performance.

Sequential reads help when you're loading big chunks of data into memory, such as loading a game, but SSDs are so much faster than HDDs were at this that you're unlikely to notice the difference between loading a game level in 2 seconds instead of 4.

Random 4K reads, on the other hand, impacts most of what you do in Windows and non-gaming Windows apps. This, much more than the other stats, reflect what makes an SSD feel fast.

Going with two smaller SSDs instead of one larger SSD doesn't even make sense in terms of cost. Two 128GB SSDs always costs more than one 256GB SSD of the same line, and two 256GB SSDs always cost more than one 512GB SSD of the same line. You're also adding complexity with RAID booting, so unless you know that you really, really need higher sequential read speed than a single SSD can give you (and most users do not), just go with a single drive.
 
I believe it was Tom's Hardware that recently did a test and found that for almost all scenarios a single SSD was better. The higher sequential reads/writes of RAID 0 only benefits task like working with video files where you are reading and writing multi-GB files. Even then, unless you're doing it all the time it may still not be worth it.

I'm waiting for the new Samsung EVO to come out. It comes with a program that uses your ram to act as a buffer. Benchies are showing 700+MB/s from a single drive, which over SATA is quiet impressive.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies i was thinking the same a single high capacity SSD, who's better though Samsung, Crucial or OCZ? they seem all similar speed wise
 
bigdogchris said:
The higher sequential reads/writes of RAID 0 only benefits task like video encoding where you are reading and writing multi-GB files. Even then, unless you're doing it all the time it may still not be worth it.
Click to expand...

Video encoding is almost always CPU-bound. Unless you do RAW video editing, you won't get any benefit from the sequential speed.
 
I have never ever been pleased with an OCZ product purchase. And it drives me crazy that the techs at many retailers think OCZ products are the bomb.

Back on topic, an single SSD will be markedly faster than any physical platter drive solution.
 
omniscence said:
Video encoding is almost always CPU-bound. Unless you do RAW video editing, you won't get any benefit from the sequential speed.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I'm just referring to working with very large files, like video files.
 
SSDs in RAID 0 gives you better sequential reads at the cost of a significant reduction in random 4K read performance
Click to expand...
Could you link a few reviews that reflect that statement?
 
Single SSD imo is better overall, unless your workload benefits from higher sequential wirtes/reads, this is about the only thing that raid 0 contributes, the feeling overall will be the same.
 
Centurion666 said:
Hi all, was wondering whats better in terms of real life performance and longevity. Two SSD's in raid 0 for 460GB or a single 480GB/512GB SSD or is it better to have two single SSDs 240/240GB and put games on them instead of combing them?
Click to expand...

It all depends on what you are using the system for. On my regular every day system i just use a single larger SSD. On my gaming system I have 3 256GB SSDs in RAID 0. I don't do any real daily tasks on my gaming system so mainly it is the sequential read performance I am looking to improve. Also note that with SSD RAIDs you do not need to match drive size or manufacturer or anything. At one time I had a 256, 128, and 80GB drives of varying performance all in a single RAID 0. Note thought, that the lowest performing drive will vastly effect the overal RAID performance.

In addition both systems are almost completely SSD bound, I have all my OS, games, apps installed on the SSDs. The only thing I use conventional mechanical drives for are data storage.

As for the comments on OCZ, not sure what the problem is there, but I have had a number of OCZ SSD drives and they all have worked well. I also have gotten excellent customer service from OCZ as well as direct access to their SSD engineering team. But mileage may vary, I was an early adopter. That being said, the Samsungs are great and I also have used Crucial, which has been great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top