Discussion in 'TPU Frontpage Polls' started by W1zzard, Mar 1, 2011.
IM running a OCZ Vertex2E 90Gb
4pcs onboard controller
Probably with dedicated controller would score higher.
i have 1 intel X-25V 40GB for OS
I am happy for you, but it dose not ad anything to the discussion dose it.
Actually, it does add to the discussion. This discussion is about SSD, and whether you use one.
It is you and the others who are off-topic.
nor does yours for that matter.
polosistealth is just saying "i'm on the SSD train" - A question which was asked by W1zzard.
anyone with an SSD can chime in
OCZ Vertex 2, 60gb
running a g-skill Pheonix Pro 120gb witht he sandforce 1200 controller
i see what your sayin but essentially im the guy whos allready loaded and waitin for your slow ass shit pc t catchup then, untill the year 2014 or sumat, lol hurry up g sort it i get bored waitin:shadedshu
120gig ocz revo x2 for os and BEST games(no wow here) 1tb raid +2tb shit
I'd love to get one but wont settle for anything less than a 128GB one for my OS.
I use a Warp drive (coolest name of them all), 30gigs, v2. I still have a agility 60 gigs in package. got it before my son was born, no time to get the systems where i want 'em. shit, i think i've turned on my main rig (see system specs) three or four times since he was born, mostly using phone and htpc. oh yeah, almost forgot, 16gig in the htpc!
Edit, got the agility mounted in the case.
Vertex 2 50 GB + 60 GB (total of 100GB) in RAID 0.
yes i may go Raid0 later this year with another OCZ Vertex 2 90GB SSD
I started with an 80GB Intel X25-M first generation SSD, then popped for the G2 version (still 80GB). I recently upgraded to a 120GB Vertex 2 for the extra space, plus I got a decent deal on it. Enjoying the silence even more than the speed though!
There has to be something wrong then wit your SSD like not aligned ore so.
Because i had a stripe set of 150GB WDs Velociraptor's, and after using the Vertex I, the Vertex became my main storage medium, and after getting the Vertex II, I moved the raptors to my server and there they will spend the rest of there life as download disks for my Torrent client.
And there is also a other very annoying side effect of raid, and that is that average latency go's up the more disk you use.
1 disk latency 100% (no extra latency)
2 disk latency 150%
3 disk latency 166%
4 disk latency 175%
And so on.
This is because, even do the data is spread evenly over the disks, that dose not mean that every disk can read the data at the same time, because of the rotation latency random data will suffer greatly before the first data can be read from just.
A couple of years ago i have wrote a article for overclockers.com, of the downside of HDD raid, you can find it below under the spoiler tag a copy of it, as i did not wane post suds a long post in this tread, and its a bid OT.
All this is not valid for SSD based raid systems, as SSDs don't have moving parts, the latency is the same for all SSDs, and you will see great benefits of stripe ore raid.
But if you still prefer HDDs go ahead, but imo the speed crown is sturdy in the hands of SSDs, for what ever use you think of, tho not always needed.
RAID 0 DOES NOT add 50% latency at all. maybe 20~25% MAX
RAID's impact on latency varies by controller, drives, level, load, and access pattern. For example, RAID 5 vs RAID 10; or database storage vs video archive; or ICH10R vs SB950. That said, I've never seen any combination of these factors add 50% measurable latency. I have measured reduced read latency in RAID 0 configurations over their single-drive counterparts (benchmarked back to back as drives were added to the array—these are repeatable results). The worst latency from RAID 0 I've measured was 3% higher latency across a five-drive array.
Selecting/setting up a RAID configuration poorly can seriously hamper performance. E.g. using RAID 5 for a high-traffic database. SSDs are better than HDDs at everything, but for the price, not currently the best choice for most practical applications. Look at the poll results—over 30% of TPUers using SSDs, whereas SSD penetration outside of tech forums (where many people have them more for novelty and community reputation than for practical reasons) is, well, look here.
Bear in mind that you can also short stroke drives and put the rest of each drive to other use (e.g. archival) while using RAID with solutions like Intel Matrix RAID (or whatever they call it now).
I got a good deal on an SSD, but after buying it I couldn't come up with anything I needed it for so I gave it away in a TPU contest.
Maybe next upgrade cycle I'll get one. Maybe not. (shrug)
Maybe I'll get one and have another contest ... who knows.
I am not using SSD yet, because I don't have enough $$. And I think I'll wait a little bit longer, until new generation with 500MB/s read/write speeds will be cheaper. My second choice would be to wait and get "old generation" (sata2) SSD's almost for free.
Have you got the detailed results of your tests handy or was it just a personal test? I have an addiction to information I need to feed!!
I am still on the budget train for SSD but I'm sure in a few months I'll be able to afford a bigger one when they get cheaper. I just can't live without them now
Four MC G2 64GB (ADATA S599) in RAID0.
Nope not yet, there to expensive for the capacity at this stage for me. Have they fixed the issue where they dont leave fragmented files on the drive and they slowly shrink in size?
Previously owned a 30GB OCZ Agility.
Currently own a 60GB OCZ Vertex.
Looking at owning a 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 (or 3) within the next few months.
main box has 2x 128gb kingston SNV425 - one for os and apps, other for steam. HTPC also has a 40gb intel and my server uses a 30gb kingston, and carputer with a 40gb corsair. SSDs are the way to go
Separate names with a comma.