[SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this? in Computer Hardware Discussion/Reviews

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:18:53 EDT

Ugly : Over at the Intel Support Community forum I found this:

said by Jozsef Dubravszky :

Hello!

I would like to know if Intel is aware of the issues with SSD's and RAID arrays regarding the lack of TRIM capability. More and more SSD drives support the block cleaning/optimising method aka. TRIM. Windows 7 has the operating system level support for it. As far as the user useres his SSD's in normal SATA/Legacy IDE mode this TRIM methid works because the OS can send the TRIM method calls directly to the drive itself. But if the user's SSD drives are in a RAID0 array TRIM capabilities are gone, because the Intel RAID controller does not pass through the TRIM method calls.

My question is that whether Intel is aware of this problem and if is there any effort to solve this issue? Are we seeing any driver updates soon?

Thank you in advance!

Regards

Here's the rest of the thread

said by zulishk :

Jozsef,

I personally wouldn't be too concerned with the TRIM capability to begin with, especially in a RAID configuration. There won't be a whole lot of performance gain since these SSDs are already very fast. Aside from that, your RAID controller is where the performance enhancements should be looked at. Are you using a RAID controller with a built-in cache? If it's an on-board RAID controller, probably not, and you won't see much performance gain by using RAID on these controllers -- just redundancy gains. I currently have an Intel-based RAID ICH10R and under all configurations of RAID 0 or 1 with two X25-E drives, the performance didn't change much from using just a single drive. I ended up buying an Adaptec card (the 5045) (sic: 5405) to see true gains. Perhaps it was a combination of the chipset and motherboard, but unless you are writing hundreds of thousands of tiny files, I don't see where your benefit for this feature would amount to much.

Personally, I feel the TRIM command defeats the purpose of wear-leveling, sacrificing lifespan for very little performance gains (there have been exceptions). Maybe there's still a significant difference for the X25-M series, but I've never used those. Anybody have links to some more information regarding TRIM benefits on the M series with the updated firmware? Other brands of SSDs wouldn't fit this topic.

Hope this helps.

And it goes on. Skipping a couple posts.

said by Jozsef Dubravszky :

Thank you for your response but I think you might not get my point. I am not too muck into performance gains. The problem is that SSD write speeds degrade as you write more data on the drive. It is no concern with NAND chips wearout it is a matter of the method that SSD's use for writing and overwriting data. You can describe it as a kind of defragmentation but it is not that simple. You should check on this article if you are not sure what is TRIM: »anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.as···531&p=10.

If you do not get any performance increase with RAID0 you have obviously going wrong.

TRIM support is more likely to be solved on the RAID controller's side.

Which brings us to the RAID controller.
Recall that zulishk had recommended a $400 Adaptec raid card to solve this issue.
Well, in a different thread at that same forum he is asking for a "zeroing tool" to reset his SLC drives.
Makes one think, "hum" about zulish's experience with SLC's.
Is it not as good as he is telling others, perhaps?

Meanwhile over on the Newegg forums m.oreilly has put it all together. (He posted in BOTH the Intel Support Community forum AND the Newegg forum.)

said by m.oreilly at Intel :

william, it seems you are unawares of the multitude of mlc drives that are available do experience performance degradation w/o the sort of "cleanup" trim offers. regarding raid, i certianly notice the speed difference between using a single drive and 4 in a raid0 array, and would really like to have discard/trim support on my intel based workstation ich (which uses system ram for cache, if i'm not mistaken), which by the way offers very good performance (up to and including x4 ssd) compared to the adaptec you stated you have (i also run one, and the ich option performance is quite close). mlc drives are a bit different than the slc, and can really benefit from trim/discard. even slc can experience similar performance degradation effects over time w/o it's implementation.

.. and ..

said by m.oreilly at Newegg :

the ticket...(referring here to the Adaptec 2258100-R PCI-Express x8 SATA / SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) 5405 Kit Controller Card RAID levels 0, 1, 1E, 5, 5EE, ... - Retail)
»www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···16103096

Pros: tapping 900 reads and 680 writes w/this and 4x 30gig vertex drives. this is "the little card that could": 1.2ghz intel 348 iop, barebones card at stupid low price, one of the few inexpensive hba options that handles multiple raided high throughput ssds. nice to see newegg has this card in stock.

Cons: might not be for everyone's system, as your particular mobo bios/irq headroom/smb situation may not play well w/the 5 series or similar cards from other manufacturers.

Other Thoughts: that said, these are selling like hotcakes, and being used in high performance ssd raid arrays on varying system platforms with very positive results. until sata III/sas 6/pci-e drives are available, this is the ticket, and an inexpensive one at that...

My read (pun) on all this is simple.
Intel is in BOTH the motherboard chipset and the hardware (SSD), so they have the most work to do on this.
(And the most to lose if it were to be somehow crappy.)
At the Intel forums (obviously, since it is hosted by Intel) there is a disciplined adherence to the company line of not giving hints or predictions of new product releases, firmware updates, etc.

Whenever this is finally resolved, given that Intel just dominates this (both of them, chipset and SSD, at the server level for sure) market; then it will be like someone had dynamited a dam.
The chipset updates, firmware revisions, BIOS updates, and new product announcements will burst forth in a torrent.

I'm not buying a $400 card to do through great effort what may become a free (and easier) standard feature of newer hardware within a few months.
And do not forget the fact that whatever performance one does gain from a tricked-out rig today will inexorably decline, so long as there is no TRIM.

Anand sums this up very well.

said by Anand Lal Shimpi :

Every controller manufacturer I’ve talked to intends on supporting TRIM whenever there’s an OS that takes advantage of it. The big unknown is whether or not current drives will be firmware-upgradeable to supporting TRIM as no manufacturer has a clear firmware upgrade strategy at this point.

I expect that whenever Windows 7 supports TRIM we’ll see a new generation of drives with support for the command. Whether or not existing drives will be upgraded remains to be seen, but I’d highly encourage it.

And this is THE greatest factor driving the entire process along.

said by Anand Lal Shimpi :

with support for TRIM hopefully arriving close to the release of Windows 7, it may be very tempting to wait. Given that the technology is still very new, the next few revisions to drives and controllers should hold tremendous improvements.

Anand sounds like he's on it. -- I'm holding off on any new SSD until fall, when Win7 is a commercial product.

As is so often the case, software is driving the hardware.
And finally, with MS, for good or bad, the leader in this regard, hardware manufacturers have a clear timeline (October 22) for SSDs to become compliant, if they wish to be ready for Win7.
»windows.microsoft.com/en-US/wind···=nonwin7

--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:09:29 EDT

Ugly : The t13.org website is not a lot of help for dates.
I was somewhat surprised, shocked even, by v.1.3 being over a year old already!

The reasonable approach would expect TRIM in the next version, but that is not yet said anywhere explicitly, that I know of anyway.

This situation simultaneously raises the expectations for next version and incents t13.org to take its sweet time to do the job right, given the broad implications of TRIM upon manufacturers, SW, and OSs.
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 07:54:10 EDT

koitsu : Ah, I just replied to your private message before reading this post of yours. Sorry Ugly . :-)

Yeah, that sounds likely, but it really depends whether or not TRIM remains purely a disk-level (read: ATA spec) thing. If so, then AHCI should work just fine with it as long as the OS submits the applicable TRIM commands. If not, then yes, AHCI would need to have native support for it, and who knows when that will be (as you said). :D
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:30:39 EDT

Ugly :

said by koitsu :

I've also yet to find any actual specification details of said TRIM command; I can't find anything on t13.org, nor is there anything in Intel's official AHCI 1.3 spec.

Short of contacting an engineer (as you kindly suggested) who is not at all likely to be willing to, so to speak, "make news" for Intel in such a dramatic fashion; let's consider another approach instead. My reasoning for not asking an engineer about the timeline for TRIM implementation is not important, except to say that I am skeptical in the extreme that he/she would know or, even if he/she did know, that he/she would directly answer such a question. Employers have rules on these things.
Now if there were an Intel engineer posting here at DSLR.com under a pseudonym, THAT might be different.

I have followed your link and found the various standards for ACHI: 0.95, 1.1, 1.2, and the current v.1.3.

Yet the dates of these prior releases are unclear.

said by Intel :

The latest revision of the specification is Revision 1.3. Subsequent Revision 1.x levels of the specification will be completed by Intel at its discretion as time and circumstances permit.

Not a word on the past version issue-dates!

And the t13.org website has not given anything that would suggest a decision date for v1.4 either.

So, the simplest question that I had considered over this weekend is:
• "What are the past release dates for the prior ACHI standards, please?"

One reasonably thinks this past timeline, were it known, might give a clue on the interval to release of the next version.

Frankly, it is looking highly likely that TRIM will be part of the new revision, whenever THAT comes.

So this becomes a reduced problem of only, when?

Hence the question on dates for the past version releases. Thank you, Ugly :)
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:47:49 EDT

Ugly : I found this at the Gigabyte Support website: Home > Support&Download > Motherboard > GA-EP45-UD3 > FAQ

said by GigabyteSupport :

Customer Q: After updating to latest bios there is a new option in Bios setup menu called the “SATA AHCI mode”, does this mean Intel ICH8 supports AHCI function?

Support A: Only Intel Southbridge chipset model names that include a R/DO/DH will support AHCI and RAID functions. The function ICH8 AHCI can only be enabled under Vista. If you are using Windows XP/2000 please disable the function “SATA AHCI mode” in bios.

Now I know the fellow was asking about his ICH8 chipset and my mobo has the Intel ICH10R.

But this support answer does strongly hint or imply that Gigabyte anticipates AHCI to be implemented soon.
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:05:09 EDT

koitsu : T13 is the official organisation responsible for the ATA spec (this includes SATA).

Intel is the official organisation responsible for the AHCI spec.

I'm not sure if there's a timeframe for the next draft to become standard. You can look at the working drafts if you wish, as well as T13 committee minutes to see what's been discussed recently.

Footnote: no, I'm not a member of T13. :-) I'm just one of those crazy (Aquarian) sysadmins who spends way too much time with ATA/SATA.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 25 Jun 2009 05:34:45 EDT

Ugly :

said by koitsu :

It's a really great feature, so I can understand everyone's enthusiasm, but it's not standardised yet! :-)

Wow, great post! :)

It there a target date or timeline for the TRIM standard to be finished?

What organization is the authority on this, please?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:30:54 EDT

koitsu : Not exactly. I've re-written the below quite a few times trying to explain it, because it's not something you can just write tersely and have it all make sense.

SATA devices such as hard drives and SSDs all speak a form of ATA protocol. This is often referred to by revision, e.g. ATA-4, ATA-6, ATA-7, ATA-8, etc... You can see what ATA revision applies to what kind of devices over at Wikipedia. The ATA protocol revision defines what commands (see below) a device should ("can") support.

SATA ATAPI devices (CD/DVD drives) speak the ATAPI protocol, but we're not going to talk about those. :-)

Certain drive features are only available via AHCI. Commonly, these are: hot-swap functionality (which can also be achieved through a custom OS driver) and NCQ. Again, Wikipedia explains some of what AHCI provides.

You might be wondering: "why do I need AHCI to use NCQ?" This is a little off-topic, but I'll describe it anyway. NCQ is actually something that has to be supported on the SATA controller as well as the disk itself. Instead of the OS submitting one request at a time to the controller ("I want to read this LBA from device X" "Please wait. Okay here's your data" "Thanks, now I want to write this LBA to device X" "Please wait..."), the OS can actually submit multiple requests (called commands) to the SATA controller. The controller and/or disk can then re-order those commands based on where on the disk (physically) you're trying to access, so that things are accessed in a more rotational-disk-friendly order -- otherwise you have to wait until the platters make another revolution before being able to get your data, which wastes time. Wikipedia documents the feature quite well. NCQ plays a huge role in server environments, where you might have a server submitting tons of read/write requests all at once, and you want all those read/write requests optimised in proper order based on the above.

And now TRIM (see the link for a pretty awesome walk-through from t13 about what it's solving):

I haven't read anything in the specifications that indicates TRIM is a controller-driven or controller-centric feature. Meaning, I have no indication that a SATA controller needs "support for TRIM". On the other hand, all of the specifications I've read so far indicate that the 1) device (disk) and 2) host OS have to support TRIM. There's an article over at ibm.com with regards to Linux supporting TRIM, and all I see there is mention of it being required on the device and in the OS -- no mention of SATA controller involvement.

This could change. TRIM could become something that requires AHCI, leaving the OS (mostly, but not entirely) out of the picture. In this situation, an AHCI specification update would be required, and that could be provided via a SATA controller BIOS upgrade or a PC BIOS upgrade (for on-board SATA).

There simply isn't enough evidence at this point. This sounds harsh (especially given that I'm posting on a forum), but I can't trust what I read over on the OCZ forums -- those are just residential users blabbing about what's better and lots of mumbo jumbo. I'd really have to talk to an *actual engineer* familiar with both the in-draft ATA specification as well as SSDs to determine where the focus point is.

Bottom line: the world doesn't know enough about TRIM at this point to make it a deciding factor when purchasing an SSD, a SATA controller / motherboard, or an OS. It's a really great feature, so I can understand everyone's enthusiasm, but it's not standardised yet! :-)
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 04:45:36 EDT

Ugly :

said by koitsu :

Meaning: with ATA, it's up to 1) the OS (We assume here - Win7 RC) to know what commands to send to the drive, and 2) the drive to understand said commands.

But with regards to AHCI, that might be a different story altogether. AHCI does appear to define a list of permitted commands per specification revision, and (usually) a controller can support a newer AHCI revision assuming its microcode can be updated. Usually this is done via a PC BIOS upgrade.

But as I mentioned, I can't find any confirmation of TRIM existing in the AHCI 1.3 specification, nor on t13.org (who's responsible for the ATA command set, e.g. ATA-8 and so on).

EDIT: Ah ha, I found it! The TRIM command isn't part of any official standard at this point -- it's defined in a working draft over at t13:

»www.t13.org/Documents/UploadedDo···CS-2.pdf

"So how do I do this?" Well, not easily. ... On Windows, it's probably possible too, but I have no idea how to interface with an ATA drive at such a low level on Windows.

But remember, this is a working draft, which does not guarantee any existing devices (on market or in development) support it. Some can, but they don't have to; it's not an official published standard yet, hence "working draft". For all we know, the word offset at 169 could be moved to some other offset in the next draft. *shrug* This is much like vendors releasing 802.11n WiFi devices on the market when the specification isn't even out of draft yet.

Hum, I think the point here is that one should not even think about finding TRIM as a standard mobo feature for a while.
And I'm certainly NOT going to try hacking this myself!

Whenever it DOES become available, (assuming by then one's mobo is not too old for the manufacturer to even bother) the addition of the TRIM functionality will be done via offering a new BIOS update file to download from the mobo manufacturer's website. Of course, newly manufactured mobos will ship with TRIM already installed in the shipping BIOS.

Frankly, I am happy to wait for a coherent standard and do not need a manufacturer to try a rushed rogue implementation by itself.

• Have I got this right koitsu ?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:09:19 EDT

koitsu : I don't think the motherboard/chipset (specifically southbridge) would be responsible for TRIM. Well, sort of. I'd better explain.

The ICH10 acts as a controller, but does not act as an ATA command filter device. You can submit invalid ATA commands to a disk attached to the SATA bus, and you'll get back an error from the drive if the command isn't supported -- this happens all the time with OSes like Solaris and Linux which do SATA-to-SCSI emulation (drive appears in the OS as a SCSI drive, uses SCSI utilities and kernel features, but when sending actual commands to the drive, go through a software (kernel) "translation" layer which maps SCSI commands to ATA).

Meaning: with ATA, it's up to 1) the OS to know what commands to send to the drive, and 2) the drive to understand said commands.

But with regards to AHCI, that might be a different story altogether. AHCI does appear to define a list of permitted commands per specification revision, and (usually) a controller can support a newer AHCI revision assuming its microcode can be updated. Usually this is done via a PC BIOS upgrade.

But as I mentioned, I can't find any confirmation of TRIM existing in the AHCI 1.3 specification, nor on t13.org (who's responsible for the ATA command set, e.g. ATA-8 and so on).

EDIT: Ah ha, I found it! The TRIM command isn't part of any official standard at this point -- it's defined in a working draft over at t13:

»www.t13.org/Documents/UploadedDo···CS-2.pdf

Relevant sections:

- Section 7.10.3.2
- Section 7.18.7.1
- Section 7.18.7.30 (defines "indeterminate behaviour", e.g. if capabilities don't match)

Based on Section 7.18.7.1, issuing command 0xEC (IDENTIFY DEVICE) to the device attached to the ATA bus, and examining bit #0 of word 169, we can determine whether or not the device supports TRIM (1 == available, 0 == not available).

"So how do I do this?" Well, not easily. I think Linux offers a way to submit custom ATA commands to the device and get back all the raw data returned. FreeBSD offers this capability but only through SCSI (using "camcontrol cmd"). It's definitely possible to modify FreeBSD's ata(4) driver and atacontrol(8) command to support something similar. On Windows, it's probably possible too, but I have no idea how to interface with an ATA drive at such a low level on Windows.

But remember, this is a working draft, which does not guarantee any existing devices (on market or in development) support it. Some can, but they don't have to; it's not an official published standard yet, hence "working draft". For all we know, the word offset at 169 could be moved to some other offset in the next draft. *shrug* This is much like vendors releasing 802.11n WiFi devices on the market when the specification isn't even out of draft yet.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:02:50 EDT

Ugly :

said by sdgthy :

Nice find, I was wondering what exactly TRIM was...

I think if you check the 2CPU thread it's mentioned that a later firmware version for the Intel X25-E added TRIM support.

OK, so that only leaves the mobo chipset as being unclear on whether it does or does NOT support the TRIM command.

• Any ideas on the mobo supporting TRIM, please?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:31:00 EDT

anon :

said by Ugly :

I got this from a friend:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM_(SSD_command)

Nice find, I was wondering what exactly TRIM was...

I think if you check the 2CPU thread it's mentioned that a later firmware version for the Intel X25-E added TRIM support.

It's starting look like all the good SSD's will only be SATA. :huh: I want a PATA version for my laptop...

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 22:07:10 EDT

koitsu :

said by Ugly :

It looks like Win7 is gonna be good. -- Perhaps even better than the Hardware?
• How does one know if the X25-E Intel SLC drives can handle the TRIM command?

I'd Email Intel Support and ask. (If I was keeping my X25-M I'd probably consider doing this myself.) Be sure to request that the question be given to an actual engineer for confirmation.

There's an answer on the Intel forums, but I would take it with a grain of salt.

I've also yet to find any actual specification details of said TRIM command; I can't find anything on t13.org, nor is there anything in Intel's official AHCI 1.3 spec. The only way to be sure to is to get in contact with an actual engineer. :-)
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:46:14 EDT

Ugly :

said by koitsu :

And do not let anyone tell you that AHCI == RAID; that's false. I use AHCI on all of my ICH7R boards and *do not* use BIOS-level RAID. AHCI is just an interface command specification that's standardised so OSes can speak AHCI to the controller rather than having to speak the classic ATA protocol(s). It's a good protocol when implemented correctly (Intel has it down pat, AMD/ATI has theirs down pretty good with some quirks, and I have no idea about nVidia, VIA, JMicron, or SiliconImage).

I got this from a friend:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM_(SSD_command)

said by Wikipedia :

TRIM has already been implemented in Windows 7 release candidate, but until solid state drives are updated with firmware that can understand the command, it will simply be ignored.

It looks like Win7 is gonna be good. -- Perhaps even better than the Hardware?
• How does one know if the X25-E Intel SLC drives can handle the TRIM command?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 13:46:20 EDT

Fishead1 : Am I right that all your gaining with a RAID 0 is loading time like booting up and in games when they need to populate a new area say in a game or reloading a saved game?
I went thru the whole RAID thing back in 2005 and thought I was going to have games run faster.
I can see the value in other RAID 1 ,RAID 5,RAID 10 ,etc for back up of important stuff (redundancy).

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:22:24 EDT

Martinus : Great thread.

So, the consensus is that Windows 7 correctly aligns partition boundaries on install and you don't need to do anything extra "by hand"?

I'm planning on getting a couple of SSDs for my next rig when W7 comes out.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 20 Jun 2009 08:52:55 EDT

Ugly :

said by Cabal :
Vista and Windows 7 correctly align partition boundaries on install.

So here's the current plan, involving BOTH XP and Win7. (not wasting time w/ Vista)
1. The mobo gets up and running with an ordinary spinniing platter HD and boot from Win XPpro.

2. Next, a SSD or pair of SSD's are added.

3. Boot into Win7 install disc and employ tools of Win7 installer to create SSD partition for OS and Raid-0 (no bios-type Raid!).

Bird says, "No need for Raid-driver floppy and F6. This is Win7" -- Right?

4. Complete Win7 installation.

Result = dual boot: XP and Win7.

Is this good?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:38:54 EDT

Cabal :

said by koitsu :

This proves that you literally cannot "drop in" an SSD to be a HD replacement, at least with XP.

That's correct. I'm not sure why you're surprised, though, it was released 8 years ago. Vista and Windows 7 correctly align partition boundaries on install.

At this time, I don't believe any Linux or BSD distributions do so correctly, either, but there are plenty of write-ups about it.

»thunk.org/tytso/blog/2009/02/20/···ck-size/
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:18:01 EDT

aurgathor :

said by koitsu :

This proves that you literally cannot "drop in" an SSD to be a HD replacement, at least with XP.

That actually depends on the type of the SSD. DRAM based, or simpler flash based SSD should have less issue than flash based SSDs with sophisticated firmware.
--
And the winner is:

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:58:12 EDT

anon :

said by koitsu :

This proves that you literally cannot "drop in" an SSD to be a HD replacement, at least with XP.

Same thing applies for a RAID array, it's nothing new. I do think I've seen something about Vista making this easier.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:24:27 EDT

koitsu : Cabal is referring to these two threads:

»www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum···?t=50376
»www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum···?t=48309

No, I hadn't done any of that. In fact, I think that just adds further evidence to my frustration; somehow I'm magically supposed to have an existing machine running Windows where I can create the partition/filesystem along a 4KB boundary point. This proves that you literally cannot "drop in" an SSD to be a HD replacement, at least with XP.

Not only was I unaware of these implications, and although I am *quite* familiar what it is diskpart.exe does (technically), such a requirement is... well, I'm disappointed. The SSD is still going back, because chances are I will absolutely forget this as well as all the other "one-offs" to get the performance benefits, the next time I format the machine (which I do with Windows every 4-5 months). In fact, this whole "dance" reminds me of the rigmarole I had to go through with VIA chipsets and Windows 2000.

I told Ugly I'd be most interested to hear how Windows 7 performs on his 2xSSD RAID-0 stripe once he gets all of that squared away. If W7 does all of this out-of-the-box, then awesome (I already run W7 on my laptop at work, but it's HDD-based).
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:01:41 EDT

Cabal :

said by koitsu :

Well I got my X25-M this week, and thought I'd blog about it.

»koitsu.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/···dows-xp/

At this point I'm going to return it. I don't think present-day software, nor Windows XP, is really "ready" for SSDs yet. I'll probably be looking into getting a WD3000HLFS instead, as that drive should run at a lower temperature than my present hard drive and provide faster I/O. (My first 10krpm drive...)

Did you 4K-align the partition(s) prior to installing XP? I didn't see it in my skimming of the post, and many of your symptoms mirror those problems described in the oft-linked OCZ forum post about proper SSD partitioning.
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:50:26 EDT

Ugly :

said by koitsu :

Well I got my X25-M this week, and thought I'd blog about it.

»koitsu.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/···dows-xp/

That's a great read; worth the click.

said by koitsu :

At this point I'm going to return it. I don't think present-day software, nor Windows XP, is really "ready" for SSDs yet. I'll probably be looking into getting a WD3000HLFS instead, as that drive should run at a lower temperature than my present hard drive and provide faster I/O. (My first 10krpm drive...)

Hum, certainly its fair to say that Windows 7 will do somewhat better.

Indeed, let's just dig a bit deeper.
• Windows 7 has native Raid support, right?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 01:28:37 EDT

koitsu : Well I got my X25-M this week, and thought I'd blog about it.

»koitsu.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/···dows-xp/

At this point I'm going to return it. I don't think present-day software, nor Windows XP, is really "ready" for SSDs yet. I'll probably be looking into getting a WD3000HLFS instead, as that drive should run at a lower temperature than my present hard drive and provide faster I/O. (My first 10krpm drive...)
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 15:27:22 EDT

Ugly : Wow! -- Simply one of, if not the, most kind, helpful, and informative posts I've ever read at DSLR.com. Evah!

How does that kudos thingy work?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 14:28:23 EDT

koitsu :

said by Ugly :

Hum, is the Raid implementation on this Gigabyte mobo »www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···13128358 from a standard SATA controller?

The GA-EP45-UD3P has two SATA controllers -- an Intel ICH10R, and a JMicron controller (which Gigabyte calls "GIGABYTE SATA2"). The GIGABYTE SATA2 controller is wired to the purple SATA ports (labelled "GSATA2_x"), while the Intel is wired to the orange ones (labelled "SATA2_x").

Here's a high-resolution image of the board; the controller you should avoid is at the very bottom of the board. I recommend you disable the GIGABYTE SATA2 controller in the BIOS and avoid the purple ports; instead use the ICH10R exclusively.

"Why do you hate JMicron?"

Three reasons: 1) shoddy drivers, 2) undocumented controllers (making it hard for open-source developers), and 3) responsible for the horrible performance seen in cheap MLCs (re: the JMicron SATA controller on SSD drives + Samsung memory). The company has existed too long to have these kind of recurring problems, so screw 'em. :-) I feel the same way about Realtek.

said by Ugly :

How does one reliably avoid this? Will these chipsets do it right with a pair of SSD's?

Chipsets
North Bridge Intel P45
South Bridge Intel ICH10R

The southbridge (ICH10R) is what drives SATA, not the northbridge (P45). See page 31 of the Intel ICH10 PDF for what devices/features the ICH10 southbridge is responsible for.

You can avoid use of vendor-centric metadata by NOT choosing "RAID" mode in the BIOS for your system. Instead, you can use your operating system's native RAID or disk interleaving support (in this case striping). Here's a list of present-day OSes and what's available, specifically RAID-0:

FreeBSD: ZFS, gstripe, gvinum, ccd
Linux: Btrfs, md
OS X: Disk Utility
Solaris: ZFS, Solaris Volume Manager
Windows: Striped volumes (requires use of "dynamic disks", see Microsoft's site or Google)

I have no idea what said features in Windows and OS X perform like, or how to administrate them.

You can use BIOS-level RAID if you want (with Intel ICHxx controllers it's quite reliable on the Windows platform), but you need to remember that once you set your BIOS to RAID mode, the *entire controller* acts in RAID mode. You can't tell it "I want RAID-0 on ports 0 and 1, and standard SATA/non-RAID on ports 2-5". However, you can used a "mixed mode" environment; say you have 4 disks on the ICH10R, and you want 2 to be standalone (non-RAID) and 2 to be RAID-0. You can do that -- you just define the RAID-0 stripe in the ICH10R BIOS (not the PC BIOS!) for 2 of the 4 disks. :-)

Also worth noting is that when the ICHxx controllers are in RAID mode, you cannot have ATAPI (CD/DVD) drives connected to them; they won't function. This works fine if the controller is operating in Enhanced, Compatibility (PATA emulation), or AHCI mode.

Some of the above OSes also have limitations/problem if your OS is installed on a RAID-0'd volume and you're using the OS-level RAID. I have a tendency to keep my OS disks as standalone (no RAID), and for RAID volumes use a separate controller or use OS-level RAID. E.g. a 3-disk system would have 1 disk for the OS, and 2 disks for a RAID-0 stripe or RAID-1 mirror.

And do not let anyone tell you that AHCI == RAID; that's false. I use AHCI on all of my ICH7R boards and *do not* use BIOS-level RAID. AHCI is just an interface command specification that's standardised so OSes can speak AHCI to the controller rather than having to speak the classic ATA protocol(s). It's a good protocol when implemented correctly (Intel has it down pat, AMD/ATI has theirs down pretty good with some quirks, and I have no idea about nVidia, VIA, JMicron, or SiliconImage).

EDIT: Added a note about JBOD when Intel controllers are in RAID mode, and a note about ATAPI drives.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:54:19 EDT

Ugly :

said by koitsu :

You should be looking at using standard SATA controllers that your OS has drivers for natively (e.g. Intel ICHx chipsets), and rely on the OS to do the striping.

Remember: given the amazing response time of SSDs and the incredible power behind present-day desktop CPUs (Core2Duo and higher), using CPU-based I/O is trivial on desktops. Servers are a very different beast.

Hum, is the Raid implementation on this Gigabyte mobo »www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···13128358 from a standard SATA controller?

said by koitsu :

I don't particularly like BIOS RAIDs because you're tied in to the vendors' metadata implementation; if one of your drives in the array dies, you'll very likely be visiting a data recovery shop to get your array back. (In fact, I've seen two recent posts on this forum of users having to do exactly that -- I warned them... ;-) Do backups, folks!)

How does one reliably avoid this? Will these chipsets do it right with a pair of SSD's?

Chipsets
North Bridge Intel P45
South Bridge Intel ICH10R
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:30:56 EDT

koitsu :

said by Leathal :

Well it's not rocket science, onboard RAID controllers don't perform as good as RAID controller cards do.

»www.adaptec.com/en-US/products/C···AS-3085/

Back when Western Digital came out with their VelociRaptor Drives (300GB SATA II - 10k RPM) someone on xtremesystems.org bought 4 of them and the SAS-3045 Adaptec card and plugged them in, now the SAS-3045 only has 128Meg cache on the card but his tests showed he was getting a sustained transfer rate of 300MB/sec. Onbarod RAID controllers can't compete with his because they don't have the same technology as RAID controller cards do.

When you buy a major brand name server with 4 hard drives in it setup in RAID (whatever) it always comes with a RAID controller for reliability and the best possible throughput.

Leathal

I'm a little concerned that you have FreeBSD beastie as your avatar, yet advocate Adaptec controllers. FreeBSD's Adaptec support has gone to the crapper since Scott Long left Adaptec many years ago. Adaptec does not officially support FreeBSD, forcing users to rely upon Linux binaries (using emulation) that allow you to control/administrate their cards, and the binaries in question do not reliably work with FreeBSD nor with present-day cards. The aac(4) driver and ports/sysutil/aaccli are perfect examples of this travesty, and I speak from experience -- I still have my 2410SA card which is worthless in FreeBSD. Anyone want it? Hundreds of dollars spent on complete and total garbage. If the controller doesn't do SMART pass-through and you can't manage all aspects of the array from the OS, the card is worthless. This is where ZFS wins.

When it comes to RAID-0 (which implies desktop usage; no one in their right mind uses RAID-0 in a production server environment), you really don't need to be looking at selling stock just to afford an Adaptec controller with cache and a dedicated CPU (e.g. Intel IOP chip most of the time).

The only advantage all of this gets you is hardware offloading of I/O tasks, which again, for a desktop really isn't needed (the cost is too high to justify).

You should be looking at using standard SATA controllers that your OS has drivers for natively (e.g. Intel ICHx chipsets), and rely on the OS to do the striping.

"BIOS-level RAID" (e.g. RAID you find in your BIOS) will also suffice, but most (not all) of the I/O is CPU-bound, so expect load on your CPU to increase during heavy I/O. I don't particularly like BIOS RAIDs because you're tied in to the vendors' metadata implementation; if one of your drives in the array dies, you'll very likely be visiting a data recovery shop to get your array back. (In fact, I've seen two recent posts on this forum of users having to do exactly that -- I warned them... ;-) Do backups, folks!)

Remember: given the amazing response time of SSDs and the incredible power behind present-day desktop CPUs (Core2Duo and higher), using CPU-based I/O is trivial on desktops. Servers are a very different beast.

Anyway, if anyone has reviews of a highly technical nature -- by that I don't mean gamer-esque "lolz chek 0ut my xfer mf3rzz!1!!11" reviews -- which prove otherwise, please drop the URLs here. I would love to read them.

If someone absolutely requires/wants a SATA/SAS RAID controller, I would recommend Areca, HighPoint, or Promise. I cannot recommend 3ware given a strong history of firmware bugs in the past, and evidence in recent days of further 3ware driver and f/w bugs that affect FreeBSD. Just one man's opinion...
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

[Best Raid Controller Card] Raid-0 from two SSD's

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:08:09 EDT

Ugly : Well, Leathal. Thank you :)

This is a major development. Adaptec is a well-known and respected name.

So now, the thread may evolve naturally to something like, ..

• .. "What is the best Raid controller card to implement a Raid-0 from two SSD's?"
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 08:41:59 EDT

Leathal : Well it's not rocket science, onboard RAID controllers don't perform as good as RAID controller cards do.

»www.adaptec.com/en-US/products/C···AS-3085/

Back when Western Digital came out with their VelociRaptor Drives (300GB SATA II - 10k RPM) someone on xtremesystems.org bought 4 of them and the SAS-3045 Adaptec card and plugged them in, now the SAS-3045 only has 128Meg cache on the card but his tests showed he was getting a sustained transfer rate of 300MB/sec. Onbarod RAID controllers can't compete with his because they don't have the same technology as RAID controller cards do.

When you buy a major brand name server with 4 hard drives in it setup in RAID (whatever) it always comes with a RAID controller for reliability and the best possible throughput.

Leathal

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 08:30:30 EDT

Ugly :

said by Leathal :

Onboard RAID won't be as fast as getting a SATA/SAS Adaptec RAID controller with 256MB Cache. :)

Hello Leathal. Please explain this. I do not understand.

In detail, what is/are specifications of onboard raid you mention, and what are specs of the Adaptec, please?

This is exciting! Thank you.
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 13 Jun 2009 07:28:02 EDT

Leathal : Onboard RAID won't be as fast as getting a SATA/SAS Adaptec RAID controller with 256MB Cache. :)

SSD still isn't there yet in I/O speeds to really warrant rushing out and buying one or more. :)

Leathal

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:05:03 EDT

Martinus : Many thanks, koitsu

said by koitsu :

Regarding SSD lifetime, this explains it, and this should put your worries to rest.

Thanks for the links too. Looks like you anticipated my next question :)

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:57:36 EDT

Ugly :

said by Anandtech article :

Thankfully with better reliability than conventional hard disks you should be able to put two of these in RAID 0, doubling capacity without any fear of reduced reliability. Then we get back to the pricing problem unfortunately.

If Intel can get capacities over 100GB at reasonable prices in the near future, I'd say that the X25-M would be the best upgrade you could possibly do to your system. I'm curious to see what pricing and availability will be like for the 160GB drives, but ..

.. Intel is being pretty tight lipped about them.

This (quote above) is the spot-on question from the article. Thanks for that link koitsu :)

• So, any news or rumors on SSD developments or new product announcements?

Bird is hoping for news of a larger Intel SLC drive, as a means to (finally) exert downward price pressure on the entire SLC product category.
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:15:13 EDT

koitsu :

said by Martinus :

OK, so what's better? SLC or MLC?

Please take some time out of your day and read the following article in full:

»www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/in···x?i=3403

Simple answer: SLC is better in the sense that it "lasts longer and is faster", but the cost difference is substantial (much more expensive).

The Intel X25-M was/is an MLC SSD which pretty much surprised the world given its incredible performance.

Other SSD vendors have since come out with similarly impressive drives, but given that "first-gen" MLC drives often contains a JMicron controller + Samsung flash and performed absolutely horribly (random stalls on small I/O reads, machine crashing during start-up, I/O errors, etc.), everyone was like "MLC sucks, screw it". This is one of the reasons people go with the X25-M, even though OCZ and some other companies make MLC-based drives today which (based on reviews) don't suffer from said problem(s).

Regarding SSD lifetime, this explains it, and this should put your worries to rest.

If you have the cash to blow, go SLC. If you'd rather get the most bang for your buck, go MLC.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:05:46 EDT

Martinus : OK, so what's better? SLC or MLC?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:53:30 EDT

Ugly :

said by inachu :

I connected 8 usb thumb drives to my pc and used each one for swap file space and my old pc is like new again.

Hahahaha!
Anyone ever raided a usb thumb drive before?

Hum, birds do not have thumbs.
Where is your car parked?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:26:25 EDT

howie : Hey Bird... I'm dying to see the benchmarks of your new SSD system. Hurry up and order it already! ;-)

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:59:07 EDT

inachu : I connected 8 usb thumb drives to my pc and used each one for swap file space and my old pc is like new again.

Hahahaha!
Anyone ever raided a usb thumb drive before?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 07 Jun 2009 16:41:20 EDT

Ugly : Oh, I get it. The SLC's are the ones being sold now (today).
That article is somewhat old, in technology terms anyway.

• My misunderstanding was [that] the current x25-E will be updated (perhaps soon) by "performance-tuned." x25-E's, v.2
Thanks for helping a n00bish bird :o
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:55:30 EDT

Quentin : SLC means 'Single Level Cell'

With SSD's, there's SLC, and MLC (Multi Level Cell)

Quote From »www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/in···403&cp=5 :
Both of the -M models are based on Intel's MLC flash, while a X25-E using SLC flash will be due out by the end of this year. I'll detail the differences in a bit.

The pricing is rough, that puts Intel's X25-M at cheaper than SLC drives on the market but more expensive than MLC drives. Your options are effectively to get a 128GB MLC drive, an 80GB Intel X25-M or a 64GB SLC drive. But as you can expect, I wouldn't be quite this excited if the decision were that easy. Over the next several pages we're going to walk through the architecture of a NAND flash based SSD, investigate the problems with current MLC drives (and show how the Intel drive isn't affected) and finally compare the performance of the Intel drive to MLC, SLC and standard hard drives (both 2.5" and 3.5") in a slew of real world applications.
--
~There is no Normal or Abnormal... Just Diversity.
Member of Team Helix - Join Us?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:52:04 EDT

Ugly :

said by HotHardWare Article :

.. Intel's performance-tuned SLC drives are waiting in the wings..

What on earth is this referring to, please?

A very interesting article indeed!
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sun, 07 Jun 2009 14:35:38 EDT

Quentin :

said by Ugly :

Hum, how about what xfer rate should a bird with modest means ..
.. expect from just TWO SSD's in Raid-0 on a Gigabyte mobo for intel 775, please?
How about the 1366?

It seems the average speed for those drives is about 115-130, so, 125 x 2, You'll get an average of about 250mb/sec read... Write I'm not entirely sure.

This is a review of the Intel X25-m series, it should be close to the X25-E (In the review they run 2 of them in Raid 0, so you should get the basics of what it'll look like):
»hothardware.com/News/Intel-SSDs-···-Take-2/
--
~There is no Normal or Abnormal... Just Diversity.
Member of Team Helix - Join Us?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 06 Jun 2009 14:36:29 EDT

sapo :

said by Gordo74 :

His point is, you shouldnt run defrag on a SSD because it's completely useless and it uses up read/write cycles.

That was just a silly demonstration, I was just trying to point out its no big deal.
--
Just when you think it's over, it's just beginning.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 06 Jun 2009 10:31:20 EDT

Gordo74 : His point is, you shouldnt run defrag on a SSD because it's completely useless and it uses up read/write cycles.
--
Ever wonder about the stars?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Sat, 06 Jun 2009 04:12:07 EDT

sapo :

said by koitsu :

I can't believe the blokes in that video ran defrag. *sigh*

Uhh?
--
Just when you think it's over, it's just beginning.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:53:57 EDT

koitsu : I can't believe the blokes in that video ran defrag. *sigh*

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:37:51 EDT

Ugly :

said by Quentin :

Raid with SSD is indeed awesome. ;) How about 24 SSD's in Raid?
(youtube clip)
Indeed possible, and 2Gigabytes per second transfer rates.

Hum, how about what xfer rate should a bird with modest means ..
.. expect from just TWO SSD's in Raid-0 on a Gigabyte mobo for intel 775, please?
How about the 1366?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:04:43 EDT

Quentin : Raid with SSD is indeed awesome. ;) How about 24 SSD's in Raid?

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=96dWOEa4Djs Indeed possible, and 2Gigabytes per second transfer rates.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:35:39 EDT

Ugly :

said by sdgthy :

... what you want to know is how they might perform connected to that controller, ...

Yes, exactly. Thank you! :)
That IS the exact question, well said (written).

So, how to gage this in advance, to whatever extent possible, please?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:40:54 EDT

howie : You may want to consider one of these:
»Re: What is a normal transfer rate for a SATA Harddrive?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:47:08 EDT

anon :

said by Ugly :

Actually I am just hoping to decode the meaning of the graphic in the howie post

Can't fault you for that, it does seem to be more bling than actual info. Sorry, I never used the ICH10R, so I can't help with that. But do keep in mind, what you want to know is how they might perform connected to that controller, the specific MB is much less relevant.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:23:51 EDT

Ugly :

said by sdgthy :

It means you could see some decent transfer rates with even a cheapie RAID controller. But if you're hoping for rates near the high end of what is shown in that thread above, you'll need to pay attention to what controllers are capable.

I easily get 200MB+ reads with my Arcea card and a SATA RAID5 array.

Actually I am just hoping to decode the meaning of the graphic in the howie post
and
learn what just two SSD's in Raid-0 may achieve on
the GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3P LGA 775 Intel P45 ATX Intel Motherboard, which is how I plan to use them.
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:20:35 EDT

toplevelpot : sdgthy said: "I easily get 200MB+ reads with my Arcea card and a SATA RAID5 array."

I have a 9010b, every couple of weeks I look to see if anything new has been said about it. Whenever people talk raiding 9010s or 9010bs they also mention Arcea controller cards. Cheaper alts mentioned is 3com.
HTH.
L8r, ave
--
Prejudice against alternate consciousness would probably make JFK laugh at you; And Carl Sagan would probably say you have a blindspot. And I say you are judging this book by it's cover.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:16:19 EDT

anon : It means you could see some decent transfer rates with even a cheapie RAID controller. But if you're hoping for rates near the high end of what is shown in that thread above, you'll need to pay attention to what controllers are capable.

I easily get 200MB+ reads with my Arcea card and a SATA RAID5 array.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:38:14 EDT

Ugly :

said by Anonymous_ :

well on a cheapo nvraid card i can get 200+MB/s read rate

190MB/s write rate on sata1 (quad raid0)

So, what do you mean, please?
I'm more confused than ever!
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:28:20 EDT

Anonymous_ : well on a cheapo nvraid card i can get 200+MB/s read rate

190MB/s write rate on sata1 (quad raid0)

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 13:39:55 EDT

howie : That's where your onboard SATA/RAID/AHCI Controller be... :-)

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 06:13:37 EDT

Ugly :

said by sdgthy :

All that is meaningless, all that matters is:

South Bridge: Intel® ICH10R

OK, now that we know it matters, what does this mean, please?
Is that good, pr not?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:00:05 EDT

anon : All that is meaningless, all that matters is:

South Bridge: Intel® ICH10R

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:53:50 EDT

signmeuptoo : Double the speed? I thought that wasn't the case?

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:52:02 EDT

Ugly :

said by sdgthy :

I abhor having to log on to any website.

Nuff said. Understand.

said by sdgthy :

Be aware many of those on 2cpu are using top of the line RAID cards, so depending on what the Gigabyte board has, you may not see as impressive of results.

OK. From NiceEgg.
Storage Devices
PATA 1 x ATA133 2 Dev. Max
SATA 3Gb/s x 8
SATA RAID 0/1/5/10
Presumably, the Raid-0 is double the read/write speed.

From Gigabyte »www.gigabyte.us/Products/Motherb···P45-UD3P
South Bridge:
6x SATA 3Gb/s connectors (SATA2_0, SATA2_1, SATA2_2, SATA2_3, SATA2_4, SATA2_5) supporting up to 6 SATA 3Gb/s devices
Support for SATA RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 5, and RAID 10
GIGABYTE SATA2 chip:
1 x IDE connector supporting ATA-133/100/66/33 and up to 2 IDE devices
2 x SATA 3Gb/s connectors (GSATA2_0, GSATA2_1) supporting up to 2 SATA 3Gb/s devices
Support for SATA RAID 0, RAID 1 and JBOD
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:27:12 EDT

anon : I abhor having to log on to any website.

Be aware many of those on 2cpu are using top of the line RAID cards, so depending on what the Gigabyte board has, you may not see as impressive of results.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:10:54 EDT

Ugly :

said by sdgthy :

There's a long thread about it on 2cpu.

»forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?t=92375

Thank you for the link :)
Why the non-membership? No big deal; just curious.
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:03:36 EDT

anon : There's a long thread about it on 2cpu.

»forums.2cpu.com/showthread.php?t=92375

Re: [SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:02:46 EDT

jouno53 : Nice, did you get that board the the 2 drives? Nice read/write speeds on the SSD.
--
My Site -

[SSD RAID-0] This will be so stupid fast! Anyone done this?

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 21:51:48 EDT

Ugly : Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3P LGA 775 Intel P45 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Winner of Anantech Editor's Choice Award -- 3x Winner of Customer Choice Award - Intel Motherboards
»www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···13128358

Harddrives: with two Intel X25-E Extreme SSDSA2SH032G1 2.5" 32GB SATA II SLC Internal Solid state disk (SSD) - Retail
»www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···20167013
in a RAID-0 as the boot partition for Win7.
(downloaded the 32 & 64 bit RC's from MSDN w/ free TechNet subscription today. Thanks Mr. Gates!)

That should boot in, oh maybe 10 seconds from a cold OFF start.
• Is this a reasonable approach? -- Will this work?
--
Oh, I love the smell of fish. Guts, rotten, it's all good.