• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Reason to consider Intel G2 SSD RAID 0?

A

AnalyticalGuy

Member
Edit: Regarding the "Trim vs. RAID 0" discussion, is there a benchmark that incorporates the performance benefit of Trim? (To show the maximum performance benefit of Trim, I suppose it would fill the disk with data, mark all the data for deletion, and then sit idle for a while before continuing the benchmark.) In the absence of such a benchmark, this is the best comparison I've found so far of single SSD vs. two SSDs in RAID 0. Anyone have a link to better comparison data?

Newegg Review: Intel G2 SSD RAID Test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etW-cFn2saA

Sequential Read
249.5 MB/s (x25-M G2, single 80GB)
392.9 MB/s (x25-M G2, 2x 80GB in RAID 0)

Sequential Write
90.7 MB/s (x25-M G2, single 80GB)
165.0 MB/s (x25-M G2, 2x 80GB in RAID 0)

Random Read 512K
201.9 MB/s (x25-M G2, single 80GB)
241.1 MB/s (x25-M G2, 2x 80GB in RAID 0)

Random Write 512K
90.7 MB/s (x25-M G2, single 80GB)
162.9 MB/s (x25-M G2, 2x 80GB in RAID 0)
 
Last edited:
you should use more real world benchmarks and compare a 160GB with latest firmware against two 80's. The 160 has more iops than the 80's now.

really i'd like to see two x25-V raid-0 compared to 1 80gb X25-m

then maybe 4 x25-V raid-0 compared to one 160gb x25-m
 
Emulex said:
you should use more real world benchmarks and compare a 160GB with latest firmware against two 80's. The 160 has more iops than the 80's now.

really i'd like to see two x25-V raid-0 compared to 1 80gb X25-m

then maybe 4 x25-V raid-0 compared to one 160gb x25-m
Click to expand...


I believe the x-25m 80 and 160gb have the same number of channels, can't remember why the 160 is a bit faster, but 2x 80's should still significantly outperform it. The x-25v has half the channels, so 2 at best would be as good as 1x 80.
 
What about having two X-25V SSDs as separate drives rather than in RAID 0? And putting Windows 7 on one SSD and applications (including anti-virus) on the other SSD.

Of course, I would get the benefit of having Trim on both drives.

Now suppose my benchmark was the time it takes to:
1) boot Windows 7,
2) load my anti-virus software (Kaspersky in my case) and let it finish its bootup procedure,
3) load Firefox into RAM,
4) load Microsoft Word into RAM,
5) since I'm a developer, load Microsoft Visual Studio into RAM.

I wonder how the following would compare?
A) A single SSD,
B) Two SSDs as separate drives,
C) Two SSDs in RAID 0.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top