Raid 0 on two Samsung 830's worth it?

I currently own a Samsung 830 240gb but need a bit more space so am going to buy another similar 240gb SSD, obviously another 830 would seem like a logical choice but I was wondering how well they perform in RAD 0 and whether it's really worth doing despite possible incremental performance decrease of read/write speeds over time, as well as other potential unreliability issues, so is really worth doing? (sorry if this has been asked before I'm a complete noob when it comes to SSD's)

 

RAID-0 is never worth it, regardless of drive type. Too much risk, not enough reward.

 

Adding to that, SSDs are so fast compared to regular hard drives that it's not even worth the time or money to do a RAID 0. You will not be subjectively able to tell the difference between a single SSD vs two RAID 0 SSDs. Hell, people can barely tell the subjective differences between any two SSDs...

Here are just some of the risks with RAID 0, HDD or SSD:

• Doubles the risk of drive failure (if one drive fails, the whole thing crashes and burns). This risk goes up with additional drives (x3 risk for 3 drives, x4 for 4 drives, etc.)
• Zero redundancy (you're wasting 240GB of space). So basically, I wouldn't even call RAID 0 a RAID ("R" stands for Redundant)
• Software RAID (of any kind) isn't as reliable as a hardware RAID

Basically, think of RAID 0 as this: You take a car with a small engine, install a NOS tank in it to go *slightly* faster on the highway, and then it blows up within a few months or a year. Not the best car analog I've made, but it drives the point across (I hope).

 

Some thoughts/questions.

a) Always create reliable backups. While everyone should be doing this to begin with, as Kuroi just mentioned, an N-drive RAId-0 array will just about linearly increase the odds of a catastrophic event happening (for example, not booting).

b) What OS?

c) What kind of laptop? Does it have the "fake RAID" controller? See "Firmware/driver-based RAID" from RAID - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for a description of "fake RAID" - Or will you be doing a software RAID within the OS?

d) If you are using a "fake RAID" controlled RAID, does your lappie have one of the newer Intel based RAID controllers which support TRIM over RAID-0 with the latest Intel RST drivers? I know Z77 chipset supports it, but have never seen confirmation that a mobile version of the chipset exists. If not, you'll periodically be taking out the drives and running a secure erase or full format in order to avoid any write amplification problems.

 

Since you need more drive space, why not just get a large HDD? IF you're worried about shock resistance, why not a slower, but larger, SSD? You could get a 512GB Crucial M4 for a decent price, for example.

However, if all you need is bulk storage (doesn't care about drive speed, since it's just Docs/Pictures/etc.) and aren't going to abuse the crap out of the notebook, a huge HDD in the second drive bay (or in the optical bay via caddy) is your best bet.

 

Your point is clear, but it's far overstated. I have been running my M6400 in a Matrix-RAID configuration (System and programs on RAID-0, my own data on RAID-1) for years, with no issues, ever. Intel 11.6 OROMS paired with 11.6 drivers and above do support TRIM.

 

Your Samsung 830's are 240GB? I don't think they sell a 240GB version. Only 128, 256 or 512.

To answer your question, it depends. You could use them as two separate drives as well. I personally prefer RAID. It is definitely not a bad thing to RAID, but it does increase the risk of data loss, especially if one drive fails. Drive failure is not common, but it can a happen.

 

About the only thing I can find is you need a Series 7 mobo, with the RAID Optional ROM (OROM) of 11.5 or later. - http://www.anandtech.com/show/6161/...ssd-arrays-on-7series-motherboards-we-test-it

I cannot find any confirmation from anyone this also goes to mobile mobos or their corresponding mobile chipsets. Seems like all everyone talks about are desktop versions.

Do you have any Intel documentation showing what the system requirements are for TRIM in RAID? Have you verified thru the Hex method that while TRIM is enabled, your RAID drivers are actually passing along TRIM commands on any delete?

Also Fordy... If it puts your mind at reset, in the Anand article I linked above, they used 830s in their testing, although it was on a desktop mobo using the Z77 chipset.

 

Thanks for all the help guys, I definitely have alot to think about now

a) that's good to know, thanks
b) windows 7
c) no idea but it's a Clevo P150EM, see sig
d) see above

sorry, you're right, I have a 256GB version, I just call it a 240GB as it says I have that much available

 

There are a few references to people who have confirmed TRIM working on OROM 11.5+ mobile chipsets. I think that if the OROM version is the same, you'll have the same functionality. At least there seems to be only one OROM, which is identical for mobile and desktop chipsets.

Not me (I am still on mechanical drives, and using an old OROM; at this time in the year I cannot afford to experiment with BIOS mods, on a mission-critical machine...), but I have seen a post somewhere of somebody in fact using a hex editor to confirm that TRIM is working. Sorry, I didn't save the link, though.

 

Confirm TRIM:

See:
www.station-drivers.com • Afficher le sujet - Tuto: Easy TRIM test method

 

I am not really anwering your question on RAID 0 , just wanted to chip in....
I guess you can see my signature at the bottom there, so: I see people everywhere trying to make the point that you are not going to notice the difference between 2 different ssd's. Also I see them trying to make you believe you will not notice difference between sata2 and sata3 interface. I'm sorry people but that is just plain wrong. Look, you have a 6Gbps/sata3 main port on your lap just as I have. You are better off using it for all its worth !
I used to have a Intel 320 120Gb ssd in my main drive bay and it was great drive for sure. My msata 6Gbps is also great even when working on the 3Gbps interface it has available.
The fact is just that the difference in performance - Samsung 840 Pro 256 6Gbps vs Intel 320 120GB 3Gbps IS BIG!! Boot time, opening applications, sequential transfers through usb3 when backing up, responsiveness, the list goes on....
Take a look at the 2012 ssd charts over at Tom's hardware. Benchmarks SSD Charts 2012 . Compare drives/interfaces. Or better yet try it out for yourself.

 

It's only a big difference if you're transferring large files between two SSDs of the same speed. What makes a SSD snappy is the random access times, which are pretty much the same across the board for SSDs ( Charts, benchmarks SSD Charts 2012, AS-SSD Read Access Times). I doubt you'll be able to even perceive a 0.0x ms time difference.

If you're transferring files between a SSD and HDD (or SATAIII to SATAII SSDs), it won't make much of a difference, you're slowed down to the weakest link.

For general use, the SSD really doesn't matter (in terms of speed; I'm ignoring reliability here). SSD > HDD, and that's pretty much it. OP doesn't say anything about working with GB-sized video transfers or some other specialized task, so inner-SSD differences are moot. That argument is like arguing between a Camero and a Mustang: the subtle speed difference don't matter if you're not taking your car to Race Day .

 

I agree that the performance differences are huge between the Intel 320 Series 120GB and the Samsung 840 PRO 256GB SSD's.

Most of that is the generational differences (320 Series is a 2011 tech that competes at 2010 performance levels) and the fact that it is still a SATA2 device. The other half of the story is the fact that the smaller capacity of the lesser drive is seriously affecting the performance it can offer - and is just as limiting in your mSATA SSD too.


Sure, performance will go up - but not for only the SATA2 vs. SATA3 differences - it is a combination of things that together make a larger (current) drive more desirable than RAID'ing two old tech drives of half the capacity.


The new Crucial M500's (due soon...) would be my first choice with less than $600 target selling price for 960GB capacity (and expected ~$300 price for 480GB size).


See:
AnandTech - Micron/Crucial Announces M500 SSD Line of SSDs




If the consistency of performance equals or exceeds (it should with more spare area reserved) the Crucial M4 - this should be one of the fastest drives for 2013.

 

Assuming you have the Intel RST drivers installed, start up the "Intel Rapid Storage Technology" app. Click the oversized "Help" button on the toolbar. On the "Help" dialog, click "System Report." You should see a section for Intel Rapid Storage Technology. Under there, it will list RAID option ROM version. If it is 11.5, then you have that version on the P150EM.

Yes, this is the "Hex Method" I mentioned. Credit to WhatsthePoint for this posting - http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...check-if-trim-enabled-active.html#post9026162

 

^OK checked, My ROM version is 11.6.0.1030

 

If you do go the RAID way, please run the test as pointed out by WhatsthePoint and tiller. It would be definite confirmation that the RAID-0 TRIM within the drivers also applies to mobile chipsets.

 

Sorry to bump this old thread but I just thought I'd state that I've just ordered an Samsung 840 PRO SSD and probably wont bother with RAID however one thing that still confuses me is this

So if I did decide to go down the RAID route would I effectively be losing a whole drives worth of space, effectively making RAID 0 useless if I wanted more space?

Lastly I'm thinking of shooting some 1080p video in the future and would like to store some on my laptop, anyone know how many hours I'm likely to be able to store on a 256gb drive, ideally I would like to have got an 512gb SSD but they're still quite expensive even for an M4, I know I'll probably end up getting a 1TB external drive, I just know how slow they can be when dealing with large files

 

As far as RAID 0 goes, yes. You'll have only as much space as one drive, instead of both. So if you want both drives' capacity, just stick to JBOD, aka just slap an extra drive in your computer, format it, and use it.

 

Yeah. That statement is incorrect. A two (similar) drive RAID-0 volume would be configured with 2x the available drive space. A three (similar) drive RAID-0 volume with 3x the available space. # of Drives * HDD space is about what you get with RAID-0.

RAID-1 is where a drive is mirrored and the space is used as a backup. So in a (similar) drive RAID-1 volume, the available space is the same as the single drive itself.

Depends on how the video is compressed. Different video codecs will give you different storage sizes.

 

I thought that wasn't right, thanks for clearing that up,

and H.264 mainly

 

Isn't about 30 minutes of 1080P video in standard MP4 format around 3 to 4 GB. Does that sound about right?

 

Honestly I have no idea, I'm going to buy my first DSLR soon and want to make some short films with it,TBH that sounds doesn't sound like a lot of space, although from what I understand MP4 is alot more compressed than H.264

 

Not sure. Although, I thought H.264 was MP4 - H.264/MPEG-4 AVC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia