1x Intel x25M vs 2x (RAID 0) Kingston SSDNow V

Hi guys! I have a budget of US$ 200 and I'd like to know what's the best option (performance, reliability, etc.): one x25[1] or two SNV125[2] in RAID 0. What do you think?

[1] Intel x25-M (SSDSA2MH080G2R5): 80GB, 250MB/s (read), 70MB/s (write)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167023
US$ 215

[2] Kingston SSDNow V (SNV125-S2): 30GB, 180MB/s (read), 50MB/s (write)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820139162
US$ 90

 

First off raid doesn't support trim and can result in lower performance over time, not sure by how much though. You will be able to get much faster read times and somewhat faster write times with the kingston set up.

I personally have the x25 and I love it. From my research Intel has by far the best reliability (assuming you don't get a dead drive to begin with) and the maintenance tools it comes with are really helpful.

IMO if you want pure performance I would go with the kingston, but as i mentioned earlier without trim support they will eventually begin to degrade. With the intel you will get more reliability, more space at the expense of less speed performance, its still a killer drive though.

I would go with the intel and a 500gb 7200rpm secondary for media files etc.

 

Thanks! Is there a way to issue the TRIM command for the SDDs in RAID 0?

I've found an interesting article[1] comparing the SNV125-S2/30GB and the X25-V. I'm not sure if I would get the double transfer rate of a single X25-V using two X25-V in RAID 0. Is that correct? If it is than using two X25-V in RAID 0 would be better than one X25-M in all the Iometer tests run in that article. The price [2] of two X25-V would be almost of one X25-M.

[1] http://www.anandtech.com/show/2968/...30gb-ssdnow-v-series-battle-of-the-125-ssds/7

[2] http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=10011743

 

If your system supports AHCI, a single Intel X25M G2 will outperform 2xSSDNowV in 4kb multitheaded reads by 4-6 times. See comments.

 

i still think a single intel G2 will be faster... also has TRIM which is very important for SSD life and performance... RAID doesn't allow TRIM so really get the intel... it's also way more reliable than Kingston... or OCZ..

 

I don't have access to the machine right now but it seems to have AHCI cause I found the following lines in the System Information report (msinfo32.exe):

IRQ 19 Ricoh 1394 OHCI Compliant Host Controller
IRQ 19 Intel(R) 5 Series 4 Port SATA AHCI Controller

It's an ASUS G60JX (Intel HM55 chipset). BTW, would that OHCI controller sharing the same IRQ 19 cause any delays for the SATA AHCI controller?

 

According to Kingston[1] the SNV125-S2/30GB supports TRIM. I double checked and its MTBF is 500kh, less than a half of the X25-M (1,200kh).

[1] http://www.kingston.com/ssd/v-series.asp

 

it does but in RAID , no SSD supports TRIM... only if u do use individual drives does SSD's support TRIM... so intel is still a better option... and also will last longer.

 

MTBF is just an statistic that indicates the probability of failure. The higher MTBF the better. In reality a failure can happen before the MTBF prediction and it not only depends on the quality of components but also on the operating conditions.

It's important to notice that a failure may not be a common definition, specially between users and manufacturers. Most of SSDs are designed to identify and mark bad blocks and continue operating. A bad block may be considered a failure but may not imply data loss or prevent an SSD from working properly thereafter.

Another aspect is that the system MTBF may decrease with redundancy of components, so two SSDs would make the system MTBF lower than only one.

 

I think you mean MTBF would increase (as a higher MTBF is better), although in the particular case we're speaking of (RAID0), you are actually correct that MTBF would lower, due to the higher chance of failure (as if either fails, the entire array fails).