Samsung Magician 4.4 with RAPID 2.0

[G73S]

Just released today after the announcement of the Samsung 850 PRO

Magician 4.4 features a number of improvements over version 4.3:

- New model support : 850 PRO
- RAPID v1.1
- PCIe SATA Card, Marvell chipset support
- Remove the UAC(User Account Control) alarm
- Retain the OS Optimization mode when updating the Magician
- Improve the operation speed of Performance Optimization

Download Samsung Magician v4.4

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Just released today after the announcement of the Samsung 850 PRO


Download Samsung Magician v4.4

Ha! I wanted to check if I had that version, so I opened Magician from the "Start" menu. It tells me there's a "new version" available (4.4) and asks me to download it.

So if y'all don' mind, I'm going to exit the forum at this point, close all my open programs and click "Yes."

And now I have to find out about the 850 Pro . . .

 

[Z15CAM]

Does it support Intel Sata Raid Mode?

If NOT, the app is a piece of crap to me.

 

[Cloudfire777]

Being able to cache 4GB (vs 1GB earlier) is so nice.
Note: You must have 16GB DDR3 to do this due to the 25% rule.

 

[Z15CAM]

Being able to cache 4GB (vs 1GB earlier) is so nice.

Ever hear of RamDisk?

 

[G73S]

Does it support Intel Sata Raid Mode?

If NOT, the app is a piece of crap to me.

no, I am running RAID 0 with my 3 Samsung 840 1TB EVOs and this useless junk won't detect my SSDs since they are in a RAID array, very shameful from SAMSUNG. most power users want to RAID! why prevent them from enjoying some optimizations and RAPID PLUS RAID if they choose to!

 

[CakeMonster]

So how do I change the amount set aside for RAPID?

 

[G73S]

So how do I change the amount set aside for RAPID?

I was hoping you would tell me that

 

[Fernando 1]

Being able to cache 4GB (vs 1GB earlier) is so nice.
Note: You must have 16GB DDR3 to do this due to the 25% rule.

This is what I got with my system (chipset: Intel Z77, OS: Win8.1, RAM: 16 GB) with a single 512 GB Samsung 840 PRO running in AHCI mode, but with Magician 4.4 RAPID mode enabled:

And here are the results with the same configuration, but with disabled RAPID mode:

 

[G73S]

yeah but unfortunately these benchmarks mean nothing in real world usage. only synthetic benchmarks. I wish RAPID was actually able to give me a real world performance improvement as it claims

 

[Z15CAM]

I do not use Sata RAID Mode to Raid SSD's. I Raid-0 HDD's but I have no alternative but to mount the Boot SSD on the Raid Controller and Samsung Magician is useless.

WAKE UP Samsung.

 

[G73S]

I do not use Sata RAID Mode to Raid SSD's. I Raid-0 HDD's but I have no alternative but to mount the Boot SSD on the Raid Controller and Samsung Magician is useless.

WAKE UP Samsung.

why don't you RAID SSDs?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

why don't you RAID SSDs?

I can't speak for the poster to which your own is directed; but there are a couple things.

First, and Z15CAM may also verify this, there has been this long discussion and issue -- some of it with assurances from Intel Techs -- that TRIM would be implemented for multi-drive RAID configurations. I'm only looking at this now from perspective of my Z68 board, an older BIOS (which nevertheless works great), and what WAS an earlier version of Intel's IRST software. I don't use the software anymore, because it's unnecessary if you configure your SATA in BIOS as AHCI-mode instead of RAID.

Second, while the sequential bench results for RAID0 for two SSDs are nearly double, the difference can't really offer much at the human interface -- you're not too likely to notice it in everyday usage.

Third -- there's the "KISS" principle. Even when I "add complexity" -- for instance, by adding another standalone hard drive -- I want "more simplicity." I'll be more inclined to use AHCI-mode in my BIOS setups for the future.

Meanwhile -- anybody want to buy a used Promise-Tech FastTrak IDE RAID card? [heh-heh].

EDIT--ADDENDUM: Oh, yeah. RAPID. On the "up" side, use of more RAM is definitely a plus. On the "down" side which was "down" with the last version of Magician: the caching with RAM doesn't work the same way as an ISRT SSD-cache and accelerated HDD. The cache continues to exist on the SSD when the system is not powered. With RAPID, you go up the steep slope of building a cache every time you boot up.

Someone here had posted a link in another thread to a software-house which offered a RAM-cache feature similar to RAPID. [Can't remember the name, but that's because I'm getting old . . ] With that particular software, the system would save the RAM cache to disk at shutdown, so it was loaded again immediately at boot-up.

So? Not much of a terrible loss with Magician. People are happy with the sequential benchies on an SATA-III SSD whether it be Sammy-EVO/Pro, Crucial -- whatever.

Now -- about the argument that you can create a "RAM-drive" with extra RAM. Sure. But a RAM-drive is not a cache. No -- as caching technology goes, using RAM to cache a slower storage device (SSD with RAPID) does offer benefits, just as the stop-gap ISRT pairing of SSD and HDD did. Will you notice it?! Not all that much. But if it's stable and it works -- that's great.

Oh, yeah -- and also . . . ["old" but not "old-heimers"] I remember now -- "Romex Software." Here's the link:

http://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/index.html

 

[MVR]

I've loved running RAID 0 with my SSD's since my first Intel X-25 drives. At first Intel didn't support RAID but it wasn't long until they did. It blows my mind that Samsung, with either the top performing or close to top performing drives on the market don't support it. With desktop systems now capable of 32-64GB, and server systems up to 144GB it is a complete shame that they don't implement this.

I emailed Samsung about this, about a month ago. With very specific detail. A complete idiot could have understood what I was asking for (which was "Will Magician support RAID 0 mode in the future, is this feature being worked on?") and the reply I got was "You need to call our tech support department". In other words, whoever answered my email had absolutely no idea and wanted to push the question off onto someone else.

I have an old X58 motherboard and have been adding cheap 256GB 840 EVO drives to the array. Of course I'm limited not only by SATA II speeds, I did some research and found that the ICH10 chipset had a total speed capacity of about 650MB, no matter if you have 2 drives in RAID 0 or 6. Although write speeds and iops improved a *tiny* bit, it was stuck. I found this article showing more info http://www.servethehome.com/intel-ich10r-660mbs-sata-limit-fact-fiction/ that the Intel chipset is limited.

With 11 drives connected to my system, 4 of which are EVO's, I decided I wanted to step up to more EVO's. So today I ordered 2 more drives, and a HighPoint RocketRAID 2720SGL 8-Port PCI-Express 2.0 x8 SAS/SATA RAID Controller http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

The card says it can handle 4GB/sec total throughput, and you can add a 2nd card turning them into one. shown in this manual http://www.highpoint-tech.com/PDF/rr2700/RR2720C2/RocketRAID 2720C2 User Manual_v1.00.pdf which could give me up to 8GB/sec (ok 6GB/sec after all the overhead I assume) -- but either way, for $151 I'll get a nice boost.

One last note, I know how anti RAID 0 many people can be,especially with a crazy setup like mine with 6 250GB EVO's,but I've not had a virtual drive fail on me yet. If it does, I have Acronis update a differential backup of the SSD virtual drive with weeks of versions. It's never failed me yet, I guess if it does I'll rethink my setup.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

no, I am running RAID 0 with my 3 Samsung 840 1TB EVOs and this useless junk won't detect my SSDs since they are in a RAID array, very shameful from SAMSUNG. most power users want to RAID! why prevent them from enjoying some optimizations and RAPID PLUS RAID if they choose to!

This isn't just a Samsung problem. You must know the history of TRIM implementation for AHCI and RAID -- respectively. There are web-sites proffering BIOS modifications for older UEFI motherboards.

I could go on and hold forth about the pros and cons of RAID0. The reason for a RAID0 five or six years ago is much less of a reason today. And I'm beginning to think that a RAM-cached SSD performance bench looks far more effective with a single disk. I'm only guessing, and been a while since I maintained a RAID array now, but I think the general standalone performance of a Sammy 840 or Crucial MX100 is doubled with a two drive RAID0. Of course, you could have a three or four disk array.

But with enough RAM and use of the RAPID driver in AHCI-Mode, the largest of the bench results is more than six times the near-double improvement from a two drive RAID as someone reported it here in recent posts. The cached 4K tests seem to have more than tripled over the standalone runs. And you can perceive a difference.

Everything is a practical compromise, and I've said that the difference between a speeding bullet and the speed of light isn't an easy matter of human perception. Simplicity, though, is always good. You can also avoid doubling or tripling the chance of failure over a range including the MTBF.

 

[pjm02]

I started with :
Samsung_SSD_840_EVO_EXT0BB6Q 500GB, ~ 1 year old.
Magician version Samsung_Magician_ML_Setup_v4.2.1_20130819
Rapid enabled Version 1.0.1.68
16 GB total RAM in system
Rapid used ~ 1297 MB of nonpaged memory.
Today I upgraded to Magician 4.4, looking forward to Rapid 1.1 using 4 GB of my 16 GB
Even after uninstalling Magician 4.2.1, then installing Magician 4.4
I find that I am still running Rapid 1.0.1.68, which still uses ~1297 MB of non-paged RAM.
How do I get Rapid 1.1 to install ?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I started with :
Samsung_SSD_840_EVO_EXT0BB6Q 500GB, ~ 1 year old.
Magician version Samsung_Magician_ML_Setup_v4.2.1_20130819
Rapid enabled Version 1.0.1.68
16 GB total RAM in system
Rapid used ~ 1297 MB of nonpaged memory.
Today I upgraded to Magician 4.4, looking forward to Rapid 1.1 using 4 GB of my 16 GB
Even after uninstalling Magician 4.2.1, then installing Magician 4.4
I find that I am still running Rapid 1.0.1.68, which still uses ~1297 MB of non-paged RAM.
How do I get Rapid 1.1 to install ?

I'll have to take a look and determine just exactly how much of my 16GB RAPID is using. I didn't bother to look, after seeing my RAM-usage still below 30%. I think it tends to increase over time. Supposedly RAPID dynamically adjusts to usage. All I freakin' know is that my seq-read score went from 1,200-something to just over 6,000. Unless Samsung is deliberately programming a bias into its own bench scores, it's not something on my big list to worry about.

And . . . I think I feel the difference, or I can see it . . . whatever . .

 

[pjm02]

My bad, it seems. I just wasn't pushing things hard enough to need it.

Just now I ran Crystal Diskmark, and 'non-paged' memory went up as high as 4,500 MB ( 4.5 GB), while the read scores were up ~ 25 %. Write scores were all down about the same amount.

After I closed the test, the memory was returned to the pool, settling in at about where it was before, IE 1.4 GB.

Good enough !

 

[BonzaiDuck]

My bad, it seems. I just wasn't pushing things hard enough to need it.

Just now I ran Crystal Diskmark, and 'non-paged' memory went up as high as 4,500 MB ( 4.5 GB), while the read scores were up ~ 25 %. Write scores were all down about the same amount.

After I closed the test, the memory was returned to the pool, settling in at about where it was before, IE 1.4 GB.

Good enough !

Like I said, I haven't found a problem with it, so even with marginal benefits -- implementing RAPID seems to be "benign."

Pardon my laziness, or I would post screenies of tests I've made with AS SSD. My results with the Sammie 840Pro are 5205 seq-read, 3308 seq-write, 56 4K read, and 431 for the 4K write test.

The same test for my Crucial MX100 in the same box: [sequential tests approximating published spec], with 26 and 55 respectively in the 4K test. The Crucial has no RAM-caching.

I can't rightly say if the 4K tests for RAPID might vary as session-usage varies cumulatively. I've seen the 4K test showing much higher scores with a program like Primo-Cache, and on an SATA-II controller.

Again, though. We can having a P***ing contest on whether to "cache or not to cache," but if the software feature uses RAM you're not using anyway, and it is rock-stable -- I don't see the need for real contention about it. If it's a dynamic use of memory -- even better. Primo doesn't do that.

 

[Carfax83]

Enabling Rapid is finally noticeable with this new version. :thumbsup:

 

[ahmed307731]

Ive managed to read most of this discussion .

Im looking to buy the Samsung 1 TB pro and enable this magical 4 GB caching as I do have 32 GB of ram .

from what Ive gathered this should be sufficient and possibly faster then a raid setup with reduced risks (associated with raids failing)

Fellas ,

I just want to play games and have had issues with failed raid 0 arrays in the past .

would you advise me on whether I should go with a Raid 0 setup or just get 1tb drive and enbable the ram disk caching ?

Im not a power user or anything , just want my boost my gaming.

So ..Raid 0 with no trim support or ram disck caching with 2 x 512 gb drives
or Single 1 TB drive and have faith in the ram disk caching thingy?


Any and all advice would be greatly apreciated , Ive beeen up all morning researching and am not a power user or anything.

Thank you!

 

[Fernando 1]

So ..Raid 0 with no trim support or ram disck caching with 2 x 512 gb drives
or Single 1 TB drive and have faith in the ram disk caching thingy?

I would prefer a RAID0 array with TRIM support.
The Magician RAPID mode will give you extremely good benchmark results, but I doubt, that you will benefit from these scores while gaming or working with your computer.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Is Rapid a danger for file corruption? RAM does not store data obviously so a sudden power cut could result in severe corruption (with 4 gigs of data lost)??

 

[Z15CAM]

So ..Raid 0 with no trim support or ram disck caching with 2 x 512 gb drives
or Single 1 TB drive and have faith in the ram disk caching thingy?

That is the issue I've been pondering. In the past, Magician did not recognize Intel SATA Controllers in RAID Mode, whether the SSD is or is not part of an Array using previous Intel RST Raid Drivers. May be one should just NOT install the Intel RST Driver and Magician will do it's thing?

Perhaps, today, Intel and Samsung have since got together and the latest Intel® Rapid Storage Technology (Intel® RST) RAID Driver v13.2.4.1000 are compatible where TRIM and Magician works when Samsung SSD's are a Member of a RAID Array and mounted on an Intel SATA Controller enabled in RAID Mode.

In regards to Samsung Magician Vs Intel's RST Dvr; are they compatible or is it one or the other?

In regards to RAMDisk Drives - I use it to Buffer just about all Windows slough writes and all Application Temp files loaded in the Win Boot SSD Drive to prevent excessive writes on the SSD. All my Work is preformed on HDD's in RAID-0 and Personal Data stored on either a HDD or a USB Thumb.

 

[dsplover]

Benchmarks sell everything these days.

The MBps/GBps Seq. Read is useless since the SATA III limitation is 550-590MBps.
However, nobody seems to have an answer for I/Os which are drastically increased, and thankfully I can take advantage of since I use thousands of tiny RAM buffers, each time a target buffer in RAM get's a MIDI message, it streams from the storage device, so yes, this helps me very much, but as far as confusing any gains with MBps Seq. Reads, it is synthetic and meaningless, but gee wiz, kids are racing to the vendors.

Anyone else benefit from the high random I/Os...?
Seems RAID 0 using 2 x 840 EV0s yields the same polyphony in the apps me and my bros use.
So even if they are inaccurate in real world usage, we can see similar performance to a 2 x device RAID 0 rig, for free.

Better than nothing I suppose.