SSD vs Raptors in Raid 0

N

nexxium

n00b
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
27
Looking to upgrade my current storage and would love some input. Currently looking at either the 240GB vertex2 or a raid 0 setup with 150GB raptors .

This will be used for boot, warcraft folder, and .MKV editing. I have seen that hdd in raid come out ahead in sequential read/writes especially with large compressed files (video) but, and there’s always a but, the raid will just be run off of my mobo, a gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 (no marvell raid controller).

Is it worth the extra $$ to go with the SSD? (271$ for the raid, 339$ for the SSD)
200GB is all I need, so the raps would be short stroked (if needed?) 25%

Edit: Sigh, n c i x is being blocked in the links, comming up as ++++
 
Is it worth the extra $$ to go with the SSD?
Click to expand...

Even the slowest SSD will be 10 times as fast at random operations than a raid0 of velociraptors. I hope you did not really mean raptors.
 
SSD - no question. Had 3 VR's in R0 shortstroked back in the day - no comparison. Spinners just can't get there from here.
 
Careful as Sanforce drives dont like incompressible data, i mention this out of your desires of video editing (really depends on the files you are managing), if its not compressible it will be lower than advertise performance, in some cases 80 mg/s. SSDs also have limited writing, so if you do a lot of video editing, expect the drive to die sooner than an average user, again depends on your usage patterns.

If i were looking for an ssd that could handle incompressible data, i would probably stay away from any sanforce based ssd, the intel 510 has very good sequeantials, although its randoms are average. Another choice is the Crucial M4 (C400) or even the C300.

For really heavy editing, i would probably would still go with raid 0 velociraptios, and just buys a small ssd for OS and games.
 
, so if you do a lot of video editing, expect the drive to die sooner than an average user,
Click to expand...

Even in this usage I would expect the SSD to still have a longer expected lifetime than the 5 years a mechanical drive has.
 
Abula said:
Careful as Sanforce drives dont like incompressible data, i mention this out of your desires of video editing (really depends on the files you are managing), if its not compressible it will be lower than advertise performance, in some cases 80 mg/s. SSDs also have limited writing, so if you do a lot of video editing, expect the drive to die sooner than an average user, again depends on your usage patterns.

If i were looking for an ssd that could handle incompressible data, i would probably stay away from any sanforce based ssd, the intel 510 has very good sequeantials, although its randoms are average. Another choice is the Crucial M4 (C400) or even the C300.

For really heavy editing, i would probably would still go with raid 0 velociraptios, and just buys a small ssd for OS and games.
Click to expand...

The issue with sanforce and compressed files is what has me questioning if it would be better to go with hdd raid ( yes i ment a WD Velociraptor). The intel and crucial are just out of my price range, as I need atleast 200GB. Most of the time I am dealing with .MKV or .M2ts files, nothing complicated just demuxing, dropping any unrequired subtitles/audio streams and remux.

They usually don't run more than 50GB, but it would be nice for QuickPar to be able to handle a full 75GB rebuild keeping both source and output on the same drive.
 
Get a smaller 120GB SSD for your boot, and get a couple/few 7200rpm hard drives in Raid 0 to do your video editing. This will be faster than either of the other options.
 
nexxium said:
They usually don't run more than 50GB, but it would be nice for QuickPar to be able to handle a full 75GB rebuild keeping both source and output on the same drive.
Click to expand...

It would most likely be faster to put source and destination on different drives (or arrays).
 
I am leaning towards the Crucial RealSSD C300 128GB, seems to have good sequential reads, and does well with compressed files.

Thanks for the input!
 
Here's two of the 128gb C300 running raid0 on an ICH10R (so Sata II)
a5j703.png
 
Last edited:
@Neon, what did you do with the extra 56GB of space? Just kept it unpartitioned?

And here's a single Vertex 3. Keep in mind this benchmark uses uncompressable data, so this is the worst case scenario:

v3.png


Sandforce is hardly that bad for video editing...
 
search the forums, covered before.

the only thing mechanical HDs got againsdt SSD is $ per Gig.
 
ex0du5 said:
@Neon, what did you do with the extra 56GB of space? Just kept it unpartitioned?

And here's a single Vertex 3. Keep in mind this benchmark uses uncompressable data, so this is the worst case scenario:

Sandforce is hardly that bad for video editing...
Click to expand...


It's just not used, when I setup the raid array I just set it up as 200gb to give gc more room to play. Not sure if it's even necessary anymore, just some habit that has formed from my Indilinx experiences....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top