drumsonly2002 Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Was in the computer store looking at upgrading and it was suggested to take 2 SSD's and raid them. 300 GHZ through put. Apparently faster than a Raptor Raid set up. Downside, less storage and expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I have SSDs installed in the Dell laptop - they don't need to be raided - a single good brand (I recommend OCZ) will outperform a RAID-0 Raptor setup any day of the week. For instance, Windows 7 RC boots up to the desktop in 10 seconds from power button push. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumsonly2002 Posted August 11, 2009 Author Share Posted August 11, 2009 Stupid question, but I will ask, if they were raided, would boot time be cut 1/2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Routley Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I have two in RAID0 - and they are fast. A new OCZ current gen drive would outperform mine (most likely) - but the performance gains in RAID0 are substantial - even close to n x speed (were n = number of drives in the array) So - fast: Yes. Downside: Cost - even now, they still cost a bomb for a vertex OCZ drive. There is a suggestion that due to limited read/write capacity that RAID0 would shorten the life of the drive (!don't understand this myself) - but I have been pleased with the effect on my system. If I were doing it now - I would get two 250G vertex drives in RAID0! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heiko Glatthorn Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Intel X25 http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3607&p=4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Routley Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Ouch .. those drives are fast .. Next time FSX crashes, I'm seriously thinking about a reinstall on two of those How much ..... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I have a OCZ Vertex 250GB and an OCZ Summt 128GB - I think these next gen OCZ's beat the Gen1 X25's now - and the X25's are crazy, crazy expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
))i7((SLI-Fire Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I have 2 x 120gig OCZ Vertex Raid 0 for my OS drive and 2 x120gig OCZ Vertex Raid 0 for my FSX drive and must say the performance is great. On Windows 7 under Windows Experience Index I get a hard disk rating of 7.6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heiko Glatthorn Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Ouch .. those drives are fast .. Next time FSX crashes, I'm seriously thinking about a reinstall on two of those How much ..... ? Prices are on the previous page http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3607&p=3 . Bit high still... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 On the original question I seriously doubt it because they are bloody fast to start with and the OS won't necessarily boot in 1/2 the time simply because the data load time is short. There are many processes going on that take a set time irrespective of how fast your HDD's are. I really do not know hwy you would bother with setting two SSD's in RAID either purely because the data throughput from that would most likely exceed the actual Main board bus spped and cause a bottle neck to start with, besides that there is no way I'd be spending big $$ on 2 SSD's to only use 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumsonly2002 Posted August 11, 2009 Author Share Posted August 11, 2009 Great replies! This is what they do not tell you in the computer store, "data throughput from that would most likely exceed the actual Main board bus speed and cause a bottle neck to start with". That is valuable information as the non computer types like me just read what is fast, but do not know the other factors. Now this has got me thinking, how do I soup up the bus speed heh! Actually I should use one drive and save for a faster CPU / MB etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Routley Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Hmmm .. well in theory that might be the case. If you want to take things to the extreme: http://www.nextlevelhardware.com/storage/battleship/ You will note that half way down the page is the "boot times" for Win32. There is advantage over a single velociraptor using an SSD - but not the multiRAID. I suspect the real advantage in this setting is the low seek time ... rather than data throughput, hence the minimal to no improvement with multi drive array. It seems that enormous throughput can be measured (as per the test results on the page) What that equates to is anyone's guess - but it would seem that the data can indeed be moved that fast given the rest of the system is up to it. Will that be worth the money -- I seriously doubt it. Note also that these tests were done on an older generation SSD - with a slower burst and sustained read/write than say the OCZ vertex (which is almost double). So, would you need more than one newer generation SSD? Don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgruschow Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Why the concern about boot times? 10 seconds or 30seconds, Who realy cares? I have 1 250 gig SSD. It is split into 2 drives. One has win 7 64 bit, and other programs and the other has fsx with orbx and ozx. I also have a 300 gig velocitiraptor which is used for backups etc. This setup is ideal. FSX runs very smoothly with no stutters or hesitations. I can't see any point in even trying to make things any faster. Of course we all have different needs, but in my case the computer is for fsx and very little else. 250 gigs with only about half used at present. On the win 7 report I am getting 7.2 for the disk. A lot better than the 5.9 I got from the Raptor. I get 7.6 for cpu and 7.7 for memory. My only concern is the Vid card, A 285 with 2 gigs and all I am getting is two 6.6's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.