RAID with a PCIe card?

It is, however what CPU you got, what graphics card do you have and what motherboard? Need to know that first.

It would need to be a software RAID, you probably won't notice the difference in terms of performance, and it will not be bootable.

I would simply get a 1TB samsung evo and be done with it.
 
Last edited:
CPU and graphics are irrelevant, unless you are trying to ask if this is the best use of his money.

I would not run these in RAID, as Okedokey said you can't do hardware RAID and it would need to be done in software, but until the OS is installed they will be two separate drives.

He seems to want the fastest SSD's he can get, in which case a single 1TB Evo is not a fair comparison, he should look at 2+ Evo's in RAID 0.
 
WRXGuy1 said:
CPU and graphics are irrelevant, unless you are trying to ask if this is the best use of his money.

I would not run these in RAID, as Okedokey said you can't do hardware RAID and it would need to be done in software, but until the OS is installed they will be two separate drives.

He seems to want the fastest SSD's he can get, in which case a single 1TB Evo is not a fair comparison, he should look at 2+ Evo's in RAID 0.
Click to expand...

They're not irrelevant at all. Because we don't know what system he has.

Socket 1150 has 24 PCIe lanes, if you have a modern graphics card, thats 16 gone already, leaving only 8 (four of which he wants to potentially use with ssd). So if he wants to add a network card, or any other hardware beyond his existing graphics card, he'll probably bottle his system. Either that or his GPU suddenly becomes x8 rather than x16 to gain milliseconds in performance and double the chance of data loss.

Secondly a 1TB Evo has 4 lanes for NAND, whereas your option will provide 2 lanes with overhead on a system that cannot pass through TRIM and will give negligible real world noticeable improvement, it will also double the chance of loss of data (RAID0). So all in all, if he has that money then go the 1TB, twice as many NAND lanes, higher capacity, TRIM etc.

If he wants performance, use performance mode and throw 1GB of RAM at it.

Basically for me it comes down to for $420 he can get 1TB Evo, which in performance mode would be undetectably slower, have some level of redundancy through re-allocation, 1TB capacity rather than 128GB and not bottle any other component...for me there is very very few use-cases where a RAID is necessary for SSDs (i had several high end ones in RAID for a while - just causes issues), and I assume he's not looking for a high end server use.

We need to know his full system specs.
 
Last edited:
Okedokey said:
Basically for me it comes down to for $420 he can get 1TB Evo, which in performance mode would be undetectably slower, have some level of redundancy through re-allocation, 1TB capacity rather than 128GB and not bottle any other component...for me there is very very few use-cases where a RAID is necessary for SSDs (i had several high end ones in RAID for a while - just causes issues), and I assume he's not looking for a high end server use.
Click to expand...
I would agree.

Seriously, one of those 1TB Evos is going to be plenty fast enough. You're going to get 500mb/s reads and writes out of one of those (possibly higher) which is definitely not slow by any means - and you get 1TB of space.

The 1TB SSDs are expensive at the moment, but the 500GB ones are becoming more and more affordable by the day it seems.
 
Exactly Spirit, and in performance mode, where the software caches 1GB of system ram (even faster than pcie ssd), for the Evo, it will exceed 500mb/s and come closer to the pcie raid system without the negatives. Some implementations of RAID0 will get 2 or 3 times that level, but really, who needs that right now?? Also, in terms of cost, its the same budget, 2 x 128GB ssd pci = around $430, as does the 1TB evo.
 
Last edited:
That's really grasping at straws, the short answer is it doesn't matter what video card or CPU you have, the cards will work assuming you have the correct expansion interface on the motherboard (PCI-E in this case). Which he does.

Raw throughput is limited by the SATA 6Gb/s interface itself, where the most you can get is a peak of 750MB/s. With 2x SSD's in RAID 0 you can easily achieve 1GB/s+ transfer rates. Trim will help, but if you are performing large and consistent R/W operations you are going to be limited to around 550MB/s for a current SSD. Is the extra 250-500MB/s worth it? That's for the OP to decide.
 
WRXGuy1 said:
That's really grasping at straws, the short answer is it doesn't matter what video card or CPU you have, the cards will work assuming you have the correct expansion interface on the motherboard (PCI-E in this case). Which he does.

Raw throughput is limited by the SATA 6Gb/s interface itself, where the most you can get is a peak of 750MB/s. With 2x SSD's in RAID 0 you can easily achieve 1GB/s+ transfer rates. Trim will help, but if you are performing large and consistent R/W operations you are going to be limited to around 550MB/s for a current SSD. Is the extra 250-500MB/s worth it? That's for the OP to decide.
Click to expand...

So you're saying, having 700+GB less, about the same speed (in real world scenarios), double the chance of data loss and potentially reducing your graphics card to x8 is a better option... ok straws grasped. :confused: :o

spirit said:
If you get the 840, install the Samsung Magician software and then enable the RAPID mode you can get reads and writes of 1000+ mb/s - see the leaderboard here: http://www.computerforum.com/224966-drive-speed-thread.html#post1895877
Click to expand...

And the 1TB has twice the NAND lanes.... so even faster than those benches.
 
Last edited:
Okedokey said:
So you're saying, having 700+GB less, about the same speed (in real world scenarios), double the chance of data loss and potentially reducing your graphics card to x8 is a better option... ok straws grasped. :confused: :o



And the 1TB has twice the NAND lanes.... so even faster than those benches.
Click to expand...
Did you read the OP? All he asked was if it was possible to run two of those PCI-E cards in RAID 0. He may not need storage, or he may already have TB's of storage. Both of us are straying slightly off topic.

I would never buy those two PCI-E cards, I would either do what I'm suggesting or what you're suggesting, but I'm not the OP :)

spirit said:
If you get the 840, install the Samsung Magician software and then enable the RAPID mode you can get reads and writes of 1000+ mb/s - see the leaderboard here: http://www.computerforum.com/224966-drive-speed-thread.html#post1895877

Pretty dang quick!
Click to expand...
Welcome to synthetic benchmarks. RAPID mode simply uses your physical memory as a middleman to store data during I/O operations, so yes it will be quick, but in terms of reliability it is not recommended as any power failure would result it lost or corrupt data that was stored in RAM before being written/read to the SSD.

RAPID mode uses 1GB of your RAM, and in your benchmark you use a 1GB file, so you aren't truly seeing real world performance when dealing with 1GB+ files.
 
Last edited:
Ok so when repsonding to a question we should stick to yes/no answers?

Similar to someone who has a 400W PSU, and asks "can i put a GTX590 in there?"

Answer, yes, you have a PCIe graphics slot - go for it.

No, we don't do that, we ask about the PSU, we ask about the other hardware to make an INFORMED decision.

However in this case its not only stupid, it will probably reduce the overall performance of the computer.
 
This thread has went well, lol. Have no idea what CPU or GPU he got has to do with anything. Best question would be what motherboard he has. Whats the reason he cant do RAID 0 with the board now, unless its a really old board or he has already filled up the SATA ports.
 
StrangleHold said:
This thread has went well, lol. Have no idea what CPU or GPU he got has to do with anything. Best question would be what motherboard he has. Whats the reason he cant do RAID 0 with the board now, unless its a really old board or he has already filled up the SATA ports.
Click to expand...

Mostly because he wanted to use 2 PCIe solidstates instead of the usual SATA. But since the reasons why you wouldn't want to have been beat to death I don't need to repeat it :)
 
Cromewell said:
Mostly because he wanted to use 2 PCIe solidstates instead of the usual SATA. But since the reasons why you wouldn't want to have been beat to death I don't need to repeat it :)
Click to expand...

Oh I know, 180 bucks for a 128gb drive each and using PCIe. I still don't get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top