Seems like I setup RAID 0 incorrectly

Is it true that you do not lost half your SSD space by using RAID 0?

Like if I have two 1 TB Samsung 840 EVOs, can I have RAID 0 and still keep my 2 TB or would it go down to 1 TB?

here is how I setup RAID 0 before

Installed Windows on the 1st drive,

then when in windows, installed IRST, then created a RAID 0 volume with the 2 drives. Then it started migrating data to the second drive. at the end, I got a RAID volume of 1 TB for both drives combined.

am I missing something here? how does RAID 0 not lose half the data? teach me how to do it right

see here, someone has the same problem where he only got one of the drives' space:

2 320gb hard drives in RAID 0 only getting 320gb of space - Hard Drives - Storage

 

Again,

Already answered here:

See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...h-storage/753198-too-late-op.html#post9665377

 

I setup a RAID volume through the BIOS IRST, with a 64kb data stripe.

1) the bios irst version is version is 12.0.0.73

After installing the Intel chipset drivers, do u recommend me to install the IRST driver from Alienware which is 12.8.0.16 which was meant for my laptop or to install IRST 12.9.0.1001?

2) What shall I do after installing IRST since now I have created the RAID volume through BIOS and not in Windows? Anything else to do or just install it and that's it?

I have disabled RAC task, hibernation, fast boot so far

I also partitioned C: 200 GB, D: 1.07 TB, and the remaining 30% is left for OP as per your advice.

Not gonna bother installing Samsung Magician since it is useless now as it will not recognize a RAID volume?

Shall I disable indexing or leave it alone? What about superfetch?

 

I will start from beginning:
Go to bios hit ctrl+i to open Intel RAID OROM and there you make RAID.64kb data strip is best.
then exit and you will start windows installation ,dont make any partition,SSD dont work like HDDs and with partition you just dont help them.Just remember why we made partition with HDD and then you will have answer.Does SSD need that?No
Instal chipset driver
When you finish ,install Intel RST 11.2. Why so old driver?Go to any important review site that make RAID 0 reviews and you will see what drivers they use.:
Samsung 840 EVO 500GB RAID 0 SSD Report - Benchmarks - Test System Setup, Drive Properties & ATTO Baseline Performance
Thats about it,disable index,disable hibernation,lower restore point and page file(i have them disable),disable superfetch,disable Windows search bla,bla,bla
And enjoy
You didnt tell me how you manage to do 10TB?

 

U didn't tell me what to do after installing the irst driver though bro. Since now I have had the raid volume created in bios, so what else to do with it?

I filled up 10tb on the first ssd by installing windows 7, then 8, then 7, then 8, etc not decided about which is best... until now I decided again to use 8 since that what's tilleroftheearth recommends and he's the most person I trust and respect when it comes to SSDS, he knows his stuff inside out

 

Sorry Double Helix ,i have feeling that my reply to your asking help for set up RAID was bad idea,sorry again.
Best regards

 

You need Indexing and SuperFetch enabled. System is useless without them (yeah, even with an SSD).

I would definitely install Intel RST 12.9 on your Alienware - make sure to use the full installer and enable the write caching if you dare.

This is how I setup Win8.1 (sorry, I don't know what you mean by RAC...):


With NO Internet connection:

Install O/S, install drivers (including IRST), install Office (2013 recommended) add another language (if required).

Disable animations, disable pagefile, disable hibernation, disable Error Reporting, disable automatic reboot on error and System Restore.

Don't do anymore 'optimizations'.


Connect to Internet:

Install all Windows Updates until no more updates are available.

Install Java. Install Adobe Flash for other browsers. Install Quicktime.

Install the rest of your programs.

Install all program updates until no more updates available. Also check WU to ensure that there are no more either.

Move your User folders to your D: drive.

Create an Admin Account - put in the most secure password you won't forget but others can't guess.

Reboot and login to the Admin account.

Reboot and login to your original account - create a password if you haven't already and then make it a Standard Account.


If you reconfigure your system (new driver, new program, update program, etc.) use the Admin account. Otherwise, use the Standard account instead (tip: create a 4 number PIN to have faster access to your computer).


This setup should be going for a long, long time - I still have an original Win8 machine going for over 16 months now (and I hope the RAID0 works out well for you too).

Take care.

 

2 x Samsung 840 PRO 128GB with Intel RST 11.2 ,only Windows 7 ,full optimization

 

See:
One SSD Vs. Two In RAID: Which Is Better? - Are Two SSDs Any Better Than One?


You think you're faster with RAID0, but the reality is something else...

 

Sorry this review was chewed long time ago and we came to conclusion it is for garbage and i am killing his review in this post:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1391656/raid-0-and-ssds-pointless/10#post_19981452
He didnt tune up RAID field.Maybe he doesnt know he need to do that.Only benchmark where my Samsung RAID field lose from single is in 4k read and its for hair shaft.Where my RAID killing his single its for the length of the train.He didnt even turn on write back-cache,they tested RAID with Intel 11.7 and we all know that 11.2 is king for RAID fields.
If you want to read true RAID reviews ,tweaktown is place to go and and Jon Coulter .By the way everything after two ssd in RAID 0 is pointless:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/5919/sandisk-extreme-ii-240gb-raid-0-ssd-report/index9.html
it doesn't scale properly.
Here it is,
Access times first M4 single

M4 raid field

Then Tomshardware access times

Then my for 2 x 128gb in raid
View attachment 112321
Sorry i have need to save my results.

 

Thanks a lot for the tips guys.

I followed tilleroftheearth's tips and left Prefetch and Superfetch enabled.

I also installed the IRST Driver recommended by tilleroftheearth.

Now before installing any drivers, I created an image using Macrium Reflect Pro. First thing I noticed while the image is being created is that the write speed was 200 MB/S whereas before without RAId or RAPID, the Write speed while creating the image was around 400 - 450 MB/S so now it took double the time to create the system image, 2 mins as opposed to 1

I don't know if it has anything to do with the fact that no drivers (particularly IRST) was installed yet but I will post benchmarks in a while using AS SSD

 

Unit Igor, you didn't kill anything, lol...

I'm not going to argue about 'scores' with you, I've been down the RAID0 path and I've been off it almost as long as I was on it.

RAID0 is going by the way of the dinosaur - you can argue your point for a specific array use - but for the O/S drive? Come on, this is 2014... this is M.2 territory... this is where all you have to do is use a system configured one way and then another and see that the benchmark 'scores' don't mean anything.

As for using more than two SSD's in RAID0 being useless; you're wrong there too. To do real RAID you need a real RAID controller.

As for using a two year old Intel RST driver? That is just being lazy (with the official excuse being; to keep it comparable to our previous reviews - even though they're using Win8.1, lol... - Oh! I wonder why it doesn't scale with more drives on our frankenbuild...).

 

Sorry ,you didn't give me anything in this post while I give you benchmark and that means facts.Thanks god for benchmark or will been talking about feeling only.
Are we talking about Intel RAID controller or RAID cards?
By the way I tried all Intel RST from 11.0 to 12.09 and my results are here ,sorry but I cant find better that will confirm your statement that newer driver is better.Can you show me please.
The day when M.2 hit those 4k writes that would be the day when I will dismantle my RAID.Isnt 4k that is more important?
Why you think I am arguing I really don't know ,if posting benchmark is arguing than I can delete them. Do you want that? We can pretend they don't exest,like North Korea pretend they are world champions in soccer.
You are the one that have need to comment my benchmark I didn't comment anything yours.

 

I have to ask, if we disregard benchmark numbers (which are more objective), are we supposed to go by "feelings" (100% subjective) when comparing system performance then? I get that software tweaks and optimizations exist for benchmarks, but at least they give some hard numbers? How else do you propose we compare system performance if we ignore benchmark scores?

 

Here are the Benchmarks with AS SSD Benchmark with IRST 12.9.0.1001 in RAID 0 (W8.1)



AS SSD Benchmark with IRST 12.8.0.1016 in RAID 0 (W8.1)



Not very happy to be honest. those 4K speeds are horrible

Previous benchmarks with RAPID, 4K is way better:

AS SSD Benchmark with IRST 12.9.0.1001 (W8.1):



AS SSD Benchmark with IRST 12.8.0.1016 (W8.1)



==========================================

Windows 7 Benchmarks:

AS SSD Benchmark with Intel Chipset Drivers 9.4.0.1027 (W7) [RAPID]




AS SSD Benchmark with IRST 12.0.7.1002 (W7) [RAPID]

 

From the above benchmarks, seems like RAID sucks compared to RAPID especially in the 4K writes. How do people say RAID 0 is the best for performance? maybe, but not for Evos I guess

I think I may need to do another format and undo the RAId and just stick to RAPID

 

I don't know why the fascination with RAID or RAPID? In reality they really won't improve your experience. RAID 0 is only really beneficial with SSD's if you want a larger volume while using two SSD's, like a single 2TB volume with two 1TB SSD's. The speed benefits really aren't there. Same thing with RAPID. It may improve in a few instances, otherwise it's just a gimmick. Just install the drives and use them without any of this hocus pocus.

Just to clarify though, setting RAID in the BIOS basically sets up the SSD's as a single drive so Windows only sees it as a single drive. You can use IRST to get best performance out of it, and for TRIM to be enabled, but otherwise it will work without it even.

 

and while we're at it. do you know why DELL recommends keep the BIOS in RAID mode vs. AHCI even if you are not planning to have a RAID setup?

I never found the logic behind it, and Samsung Magician will not work if BIOS is in RAID mode it has to be in AHCI mode

also, do you know why RAID 0 takes a big hit in 4K speeds as opposed to RAPID?

 

Read the article posted by Tilleroftheearth. It's a good one and explains the whole SSD RAID 0 scenario and why things are what they are.

RAPID is really just using a RAM cache to accelerate your workload. RAID 0 is simply striping the data between two drives, and the way SSD's manage data, it isn't as advantageous as it is with hard drives.

 

I understand. Thank you sir

 

I first one to point that this post is only to explain why I am impressed with RAID function.I don't want to argue with anybody.
Yes I am definitely fascinated with RAID.WHY?
I heard a thousand time,"there is no benefit in RAID" ,and when you listen something over and over again you start to believe in that,am I right?Yes I am.
So regarding to that I deleted my RAID array in BIOS after two years of perfect function and install Windows only on one SSD.You know what's happened next.I returned back to RAID set up ,next day.
WHY ,again?
Because I didn't see any disadvantage in RAID ,not even one.In three years I didn't have any problem with my two RAID arrays.
Why not to have those 4k writes ,when there is no disadvantage to that?
Why not to have those seq. speed ?You don't need them every day but when day comes ,why not to have them ,when there is no disadvantage to that?

 

as you saw in my benchmarks, the 4K speeds in RAID 0 were much much worse than without RAID. check the benchmarks I posted on page 2 of this thread

 

Not everything is suitable for everything. That's why we have so many products. That being said, a single SSD in RAPID mode will present a better price/performance ratio in most real-world scenarios than RAID0, given that RAID0 doubles the complexity and significantly increases the chance of failure. Video I/O might benefit from the fat write pipe of RAID0, databases will love the high speed random reads and writes, but regular daily use? RAPID on a single drive gives better bang for the buck unless you manage to overwhelm that 1 GB of RAM cache. It can be done but it's hard. You'll almost never saturate that double-size I/O pipe.

 

Back on RAPID, much happier this way,

Benchmarks:

 

Having used RAPID for a month before, I turned it off because I could not feel any benefits in daily usage, and my boot time increased with RAPID. Sure the numbers look nice, but that 1GB ram cache size really limits its usefulness.

If you like seeing big numbers, try a real ram caching software like PrimoCache. Look at the numbers below, it's insane:

 

True, if you have the resources, a nice 4 or 8 GB ram disk used as a chance is resources well spent.

Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk

 

the reason I don't use a RAM disk is I am confused on how to use it. Wouldn't the data be erased when I reboot. so what on earth is it useful for?

how do you guys use it? do you install programs on it? and if yes, what kind of programs? seems more than a hassle as opposed to RAPID which you enable and forget about it

 

That should have been "cache" and not "chance" Damn autocorrect. If you use it as cache then it'll be flushed to disk all the time, and losing the data on reboot won't matter, it'll just rebuild the cache on startup. It's basically what RAPID does, but RAPID packages itself in an easy to use setting for a normal end user.

Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk

 

So I have two Samsung 1TB 840 Evos, 1 mSATa LiteOn 80 GB SSD, and 24 GB RAM

how do you recommend meh to configure PrimoCache? and shall I disable RAPID if I do use PrimoCache?

Also, please list a scenario of how primocache would benefit meh in real life usage?

 

Ok, I'd do PrimoCache or RAPID but not both. Frankly, with your setup, I'm not sure I'd keep the mSATA LiteON, the EVO might give you slightly better boot performance, depending on the model of it (you didn't specify, but generally mSATA devices are a little slower than regular SATA). Besides, 80 GB isn't all that much of a C drive. It would make a nice caching drive for one or two 1 TB spindle-based drives. But I'd do a pure non-caching benchmark test of that versus the EVOs, and if it's slower, just dump it. That's the easy part.

Beyond that I'd really have to know what the size of your regular datasets are, what you do with the thing from day to day. That's going to dictate how much RAM you should reserve for caching, and also how much you need to keep available for your tasks. This isn't something that can be answered generically, it's very dependent on what you're actually doing, not just what hardware you have.

 

If OP's workflow is anything like mine (browsing, gaming, office productivity, occasional scientific computation/modelling) then I wouldn't expect RAM usage to go much past 6GB at its peak. With 24GB of ram I'd say using 12GB for cache is a safe bet.

 

Firstly, I do not have the mSATA 80 GB SSD connected anymore I only asked you if it would make any benefit to reconnect it again. But it seems that it wouldn't since it's actually slower than my Evos.

Secondly, my sig clearly states man, 2x1TB 840 Evos

Thirdly, my daily workflow is I start my system and start surfing the net using Pale Moon as my only browser with 5 to 8 tabs

I also watch movies using MPC-HC + SVP (Smooth Video Project) to make them play @ 60 FPS

I have FIFA 2015 and Counter Strike Global but to be honest with you, other than trying them I never played them, just like to have them installed for if I ever get bored I have a game to play.

I just checked Task Manager / Performance / Memory to see how much free RAM I have after my system has been on for 3 hours and it says 0 free RAM / Cached = 21 GB

Strange, I thought Windows 8.1 does not actually use the Superfetch if it detects an SSD? or could this be the Samsung Magician OS performance tweaks that's doing this?

Now if the OS is caching 21 GB of DATA, then how is PrimoCache better in real world usage?

 

Yes I saw your signature.

In your case it's not. You're not working with any large datasets at all, and generally won't even see much benefit from RAPID. In your situation, unless you absolutely need more than 1 TB of storage, I'd also drop an EVO and go down to 16 GB of RAM (maybe even 8, but make sure you have 2 sticks so you're still dual channel) . It'll lower your power utilization, and if you're ever on battery the battery will last longer. What you've got is WAY overkill for what you're doing.

Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk

 

I like to have the greatest performance I can get. Once I have money, I will upgrade that 24 GB RAM to 32 GB and add another mSATA Samsung Ev0 840 to have a total of 3 TB of SSD Storage space.

I am never EVER on battery

 

You already have the greatest performance. You literally will experience NO difference with further upgrades. Frankly you could move down to my rig and still have the same performance. And get 8 hours which let me tell you, is pretty damn sweet sometimes.

Ahh well to each their own. Its a waste of hardware but if you can do it go for it. Bur based on your current usage nothing you can do will improve your real life performance.

Sent from my LG-D800 using Tapatalk

 

If greatest performance is what you're after, upgrading the GPU will have a much bigger impact on performance gaming-wise.