Have 2 Vertex SSD drives -- best setup for new build

[BoboKatt]

So I have 2 Vertxex SSD's (60GB). One is currently installed in my main comp with OS (Win7 64), all my usual apps, etc. I am about to install all my games on it. However my question is this.... would it be better to take the other Vertex I bought (was originally for another computer) and install it in the same computer and place all my games on that one?

By this I am trying to understand if it would be better (faster) to separate all my OS duties on one SSD, apps running in the background, antivirus and all the crap I got going, and then when I run my games (WoW, Everquest, EQ2... etc), to have them run off the other SSD. Do SSD drives care how much crap is running all at once from one? Or is this dumb and go ahead and just install all the games on the first SSD that also houses the OS and it will still be as fast? Any merit to having things separated with 2 drives?

 

[Idontcare]

For Vertex and Intel SSD's there really is no benefit to segregating the installation locations of applications (including OS) by physical locality.

For all intents and purposes you are probably best off making a raid-0 array out of the drives (and then create partitions for a logical segregation of the installation of the apps) which would yield the same aggregate capacity but nearly double the read/write bandwidth.

 

[taltamir]

well... if you seperate OS from games, than the OS drive will be holding the page file while the other will hold the game, and some games load stuff into and out of the page file.

Also RAID0 is NOT very useful for SSDs while it is a boon for spindle drives. (due to access times).

I see reasons why SSDs will benefit MORE than spindle drives do from such segregation, but I see no reason why they will benefit less (the "already fast enough" argument doesn't mean you benefit less; just that you do not need to waste money doing it)...

 

[ss284]

Raid-0 doesnt exactly reduce access times that much if at all on spindle drives, but then again it doesn't really do so on SSD's either(not that ssds need decreased access compared to spindle drives). I agree with IDC's suggestion.

 

[BoboKatt]

Brilliant! Thanks guys.

 

[taltamir]

oh, other issues with raid0.
1. dataloss risk is higher
2. driver issues with OS
3. SSD alignment (win7 auto aligns for not raided SSDs, aligning a raided SSD is more complicated and should be done manuallY)
4. possibility of the array being broken by crappy mobo controller (especially when resetting cmos)...

All that being said, IDCs suggestion is sound too if you are willing to go through the effort.

 

[Denithor]

Install everything on one and mail the other to me.




Lucky bastard...

 

[Mango1970]

hahah good one Denithor! Actually I decided to simply keep the OS on one with all apps, antivirus, all video encoding apps etc. The other houses my games and "target" destination folders for final encoded video etc. I am testing it as we speak and it's fast as hell. I have 16 GB of RAM on my P45 mobo so I disabled the page file. My Samsung 750 GB SATA drive houses all my movies, MP3 etc and is used mainly as backup for all my files... along with another 500 GB WD drive which is yet AGAIN another backup for everything that is on my 750 GB drive but I keep the 500 turned off.. hooked up using eSATA and in a dock. Gona see how this works. I am going to pass on the Raid 0 for now.

PS God bless SSD.. this is stupid fast. i was so worried about how it would deal with opening or running multiple apps at the same time.. or having say 3 instances of EQ or Wow open and still accessing Firefox, outlook while unrarring something and playing and MP3. All is good. SSD = PASS on all my stuff

 

[SunSamurai]

lol RAID0 works perfectly well on SSD drives. Many of them are internally raid0 as well. The only time youll reach a point where it does no good is if one reaches teh throughput of your interface. Thats not happening with the drive you mention, thus RAID0 would provide a large increase in throughput.

 

[taltamir]

it is not recommended to disable the page file, instead set it to the minimum size. otherwise certain programs will crash when they try to FORCE a pagefile access (instead of direct ram access).

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: aeternitas
lol RAID0 works perfectly well on SSD drives. Many of them are internally raid0 as well. The only time youll reach a point where it does no good is if one reaches teh throughput of your interface. Thats not happening with the drive you mention, thus RAID0 would provide a large increase in throughput.

There is a couple levels of raid at work, in effect, inside an SSD. First and foremost the chip themselves are striped, an SSD with 8 flash chips is going to have 8-way striping. This is why the bandwidth can be >100MB/s for an SSD.

It is also the reason why smaller capacity SSD's (fewer chips) have lower bandwidth than higher capacity SSD's (more chips, higher n-way raid) while all of them still have the same latency (raid does not reduce latency, only increases bandwidth).

It doesn't scale perfectly of course because the controller bandwidth tends to be the limiting factor, same as with any hardware raid controller if you look thru the reviews.

Some SSD's (Apex) take the internal raid config a step further and use two controllers to raid the data once (split to controller A and controller B) and then the controllers themselves further raid the data to the chips which they have direct access. This is done to get around the R/W bandwidth limitations of the individual controllers themselves.

 

[koshling]

Why not just use Windows 7 software JBoD (i.e. - partition spans drives, but not striped)

 

[Mango1970]

I have no idea what Windows 7 software JBOD is. I decided to forgo the Raid setupd. 2 verxtex, one with the OS and all apps, work apps etc and the other has my games, movies and music and is the target for my work folders for encoded videos etc.. As stated, my eSATA drive that has ALL my backups, is a regular spindle drive and that is only on when I need to get something off it and/or backup more stuffs to it.
In regards to the pagefile it was drilled in my head I did not need one with 16GB or RAM. However Idontcare, what you say makes sense. I will set up a small constant size pagefile on my C:\ SSD then. Thanks.

 

[taltamir]

technically the inside of an SSD is BETTER Than raid0... raid0 is simply straight through striping. But an SSD controller can use intelligent striping algorithms to better deal with multiple requests at once. RAID0+...
That being said... just because it has an intelligent internal striping does not mean that it is "lol work perfectly".

A normal HDD has a type of "raid" inside it as well to handle multiple platters. and double sided platters.

 

[SunSamurai]

Whats going on inside a singular SSD is irrelevant, as RAID0 two+ of them still results in a huge throughput boost no matter what babble you say. The ONLY reasons not to do it is if you're scared of one dieing and taking all your data with it. Thats remedied by backing up important files. SSD are much more resilient when it comes to RAID anyway. The other being bandwidth. 2x Intel SSD will result in 500MB/s reads. Too fast for most SATA interfaces. Lesser SSDs RAID0 is fine on onboard SATA without a RAID card.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96dWOEa4Djs