SSD drives

[icytailmark (Mark)]

hi guys im just wondering if many people use SSD hard drives to store their data on. Which is better 2 ssd drives in raid 0 or a single drive is fine?.

[Pi]

Generally you don't use the SSD to STORE your data on, but keep your operating system/applications installed on the SSD whilst your data is stored on disk drives. It is definitely worth an upgrade and I would consider no alternative in a new pc.

As for RAID 0, there is little to no noticeable performance improvement. It does however double your chance of drive failure... I would recommend a single SSD.

[chrisp9au (Chris)]

SSD for operating system and programs, normal hard drive for data.
I've done it on my desktop, running Windows 8 Pro no worries.
Done it on the laptop, moving the DVD drive to external, and installing a 2nd hard drive.
Boots fast, loads programs fast, excellent upgrade!
Work out how big the SSD needs to be to just hold your operating system and your program files, then add maybe 25%~30%. You don't need a huge SSD drive.

Cheers, and good luck with your upgrade!

Chris

[04Stefan07 (Stefan)]

You can store your data on an SSD however this is impractical. Number one it will be VERY expensive (a 250GB Samsung drive goes for around $180 therefore if you have terabytes of data this could cost you thousands of dollars) and number two you do not need SSD data transfer speeds for storage, a simple classic hard drive is plenty.

As said below storing the OS and vital applications on an SSD is best with your storage on your hard drives. My desktop has an SSD with the OS and applications on it and I got an SSD in my Macbook Pro for everything.

[gb_astro]

Originally Posted by icytailmark

hi guys im just wondering if many people use SSD hard drives to store their data on. Which is better 2 ssd drives in raid 0 or a single drive is fine?.

Tom's Hardware has just posted a single/raid comparison:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...mark,3485.html

gb.

[Earl (Earl White)]

Mark,

I work in a software developement company and we've had nothing but trouble with SSD drives. We're no longer using them for storing anything "critical", ie where if it breaks, people can't work.

There's no doubt some good ones out there. The trouble is finding out which ones they are!

Cheers,

Earl

[Wavytone]

If you're ging to use SSD, make darn sure you have a reliable backup on an external HDD.
When SSD's fail you will probably lose everything in them, the files are unrecoverable/hopelessly corrupted.

As per below 2 SSD's configured as RAID0 merely doubles the likelihood of a failure.

[Paul Haese]

I have been using SSD's for avi data capture on a 2.8mp camera. Works perfectly. Capture then get rid of the data onto a long term storage device. I just want it for the capture speed.

[tlgerdes (Trevor)]

Yeah as Paul said, they are great for high I/O data accumulation, working space for things like image stacking/processing, but not economical for bulk storage. Most people who do use them including corporates use then that way and have it backended onto traditional disk.

[Garbz (Chris)]

RAID0 works on SSDs just like any other drive. You get double the performance out of them. The problem is that with the insane speeds SSDs already produce often the bottleneck isn't the SSD itself but rather other inefficient operating system calls. This is shown clearly on the Tom's Hardware link above where any synthetic test shows RAID0 with nearly double the performance, yet windows takes just as long to boot and applications take just as long to load.

One thing no one has mentioned which is a BIG MINUS, is that RAID controllers currently do not support the TRIM command. TRIM is a critical command on SSDs which allows the operating system to tell the drive which blocks aren't in use after a delete. SSDs unlike normal drives have crippling performance when it comes to re-writing data as opposed to writing an empty block. Without TRIM support your SSD (especially an SSD which is nearly full) will quickly start degrading in performance, and in the end the only way to get full speed back out of it is to use the manufacturer's software reset the drive which also wipes everything.


So in summary, don't do RAID in any form on an SSD unless you're going to spend thousands on your RAID controller to get one that supports TRIM.

[Tandum (Robin)]

Intel 7 series raid controllers support tim.

[migel_prado (Migel)]

Originally Posted by icytailmark

hi guys im just wondering if many people use SSD hard drives to store their data on. Which is better 2 ssd drives in raid 0 or a single drive is fine?.

A single large solid state drive is better than two smaller ssd's in a Raid array,RAID0 might be a money-saving solution, but it increases the chance of a failure.

[Meru (Michael)]

Hey Mark,

To answer your question in short one single drive is definitely better. In long, Raid 0 wont make a difference unless you also have a motherboard & RAM which wont cause a bottleneck. Once you go SSD (assuming you haven't yet) you will find that A) you can never, ever go back to the normal HDDs & B) they are a massive pain to deal with. TRIM is extremely important so research that before diving into anything.

I've gone through about 2 or 3 SSDs in the last year or so, they kept failing on me and it was a really difficult to keep having to install my programs and preferences again and again. However just before the last time it failed, I took a whole image of the drive and stored it elsewhere. When the drive failed, I simply loaded the image back on and volia problem solved. Every 2 months I know take images again and again just incase. I strongly urge you to do the same.

I was willing to put up with all this because I always bought them from a reputable computer retailer, and it was extremely easy to send them back for repairs/replacement through the retailer. They took care of everything! So dont always buy from the cheapest place; plus every time they replace, its a faster newer version of the drive hehe.

As everyone has suggested, DO NOT keep any files you are not prepared to lose on the SSD. I have two other normal HDDs that serve to store everything personal & important, SSD is only for windows and programs. Hope this helps!

[LightningNZ (Cam)]

I have SSDs in my home PC (windows), work PC (Linux) and work laptop (Mac). In short - they rock!

I haven't heard of many problems in the large 1.5 generations of SSDs to hit the market. My old OCZ Vertex 2 died in my home PC after only 3 months, but they were known to be a bit dodgy and I was (sort of) a fool to be an early adopter. It was replaced with a newer and faster SSD without charge by Techbuy (who I'd bought all my PC kit from).

For doing your imaging processing on they are magic. My PCs are lightning fast. For a laptop the effect is even greater if you hibernate your computer - super fast saves from memory.

Personally I think the "sweet spot" is a 250 GB disk for around the $220 mark, though you can probably do better. The Samsung 840 series is very popular and successful at the moment http://www.techbuy.com.au/p/210272/H...Z-7TD250BW.asp. I definitely think you should shop around.

Hope this helps,
Cam

[04Stefan07 (Stefan)]

Originally Posted by LightningNZ

The Samsung 840 series is very popular and successful at the moment

+1. I got the 250GB 840 series in my Mac. According to the Blackmagicdesign Disk Speed Test app I get just over 250MB/s write speed and just over 500MB/s read speed.

[Poita (Peter)]

Originally Posted by Earl

Mark,

I work in a software developement company and we've had nothing but trouble with SSD drives. We're no longer using them for storing anything "critical", ie where if it breaks, people can't work.

There's no doubt some good ones out there. The trouble is finding out which ones they are!

Cheers,

Earl

I have over 200 SSDs installed through work over the past 3 years. So far not a single failure among the intel or crucial drives. Other brands we have had failures (OCZ worst, also had Samsung and Patriot drives fail). We only install Crucials or Intels now.
Had plenty of standard HDDs fail over the past few years. Traditional drives seem to have become far less reliable in the last 6 years or so.

[04Stefan07 (Stefan)]

Originally Posted by Poita

(OCZ worst, also had Samsung and Patriot drives fail).

I agree about Samsung failing even though I got one in my Mac.

Over the years I have had the following Samsung products.
- Samsung Jet mobile (touchscreen failed, got replaced now mobile has failed entirely).
- Samsung Blu Ray drive for PC (could not read disks properly, got it replaced with another of the same model and the exact same problem. Got it replaced a 2nd time but with an LG one and works perfectly! It must have been a faulty batch of Samsung drives).
- Samsung 24" LED computer monitor (2 dead pixels only after 2 weeks!).

These failures have put me off Samsung and I think they are unreliable products (even though everyone thinks they are the best now that they are strong in the TV and mobile (Galaxy S3-4 and Note) space. When I say that they are unreliable people often say I am crazy .

It's one of those products I have had bad experiences with therefore stay clear of them however the Samsung SSD 840 series I got has been fantastic so far. I took a risk buying my 4th Samsung product but at a price of $189 at the time I could not resist!

If the drive doesn't fail it might make me think a bit more highly of their unreliable products.

[acropolite (Phil)]

FWIW the Samsung 840 is warranted for 3 years, get the 840 pro model and the warranty is 5 years.

[pw (Peter)]

The Intel SSDs are a good choice for performance and reliability.

[LightningNZ (Cam)]

Originally Posted by pw

The Intel SSDs are a good choice for performance and reliability.

They are also quite expensive, but if you need reliability, sure they're tops. If you're purchasing for enterprise-level I/O buffering then the Intel S3700 is simply the best you can buy right now.

Even so, if an SSD dies within warranty, it should only ever be an inconvenience. If you lose data off one then you aren't backing up properly.

-Cam