Samsung Magician - Rapid 1.1 or 2.0 ?

[craige4u]

The latest version of Samsung Magician software Rapid is 1.1 OR 2.0 ?

Here in this review it says version 2.0:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8216/samsung-ssd-850-pro-128gb-256gb-1tb-review-enter-the-3d-era/6

Also, I am buying soon either Evo OR 850 Pro....

So can you guys confirm tht I can buy either of them and I will still get Rapid 1.1/2.0 functionality that enables Rapid-Cache of 4GB (if system has 16GB physical RAM).

PS: Is their any real world benefit of Rapid cache? I am not at all a benchmark guy and I am a Gamer & generally open 5-6 Tabs of Internet in IE.

 

[Coup27]

I can't speak for the 850 Pro but if you buy the 840 EVO and install the latest Magician you will have the latest version of RAPID. RAPID does make a difference but only under certain workloads. If all you do is use a web browser, an office suite and do general Windows tasks you won't notice a difference. I fall into that category these days and I don't use RAPID any more.

 

[Charlie98]

I fall into that category these days and I don't use RAPID any more.

+1

 

[corkyg]

If all you do is use a web browser, an office suite and do general Windows tasks you won't notice a difference. I fall into that category these days and I don't use RAPID any more.

+2

 

[jkauff]

I use RAPID on my 840 Pro for no better reason than watching my general Windows software load instantly (including hogs like Nero Platinum). The system just feels faster. I have 16GB of RAM and a UPS battery backup, so there's no reason not to use it.

 

[Burner27]

I find that the RAPID software works well on my 500GB EVO with my VMs on it.

 

[PliotronX]

I find that the RAPID software works well on my 500GB EVO with my VMs on it.

Does the OS in the VM install in like 5 minutes?

 

[craige4u]

Well, in all the above discussion my main questions is lost somewhere it seems:
The latest version of Samsung Magician software Rapid is 1.1 OR 2.0 ?

BTW, I am a Gamer & generally open 5-6 Tabs of Internet in IE - In this scenario how useful is Rapid cache ?

 

[jkauff]

Well, in all the above discussion my main questions is lost somewhere it seems:
The latest version of Samsung Magician software Rapid is 1.1 OR 2.0 ?

BTW, I am a Gamer & generally open 5-6 Tabs of Internet in IE - In this scenario how useful is Rapid cache ?

I don't know any way to determine the version number. I'm just running the latest version of Magician. Do you know what differences are in the 2.0 release? Maybe it's only in beta.

RAPID only caches activity on the SSD, so yes, you should see a speed-up in IE. If the game you're playing is on the SSD, you'll get the benefit, but not if the game is installed on another drive. That's assuming, of course, that the game accesses the drive during play.

 

[Coup27]

Well, in all the above discussion my main questions is lost somewhere it seems:
The latest version of Samsung Magician software Rapid is 1.1 OR 2.0 ?

According to the article below, it's 2.0

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8216/samsung-ssd-850-pro-128gb-256gb-1tb-review-enter-the-3d-era/6

 

[Burner27]

Does the OS in the VM install in like 5 minutes?

Never timed it, but it takes a significantly less amount of time to install a VM on that drive.

 

[Burner27]

Does the OS in the VM install in like 5 minutes?

Never timed it, but it takes a significantly less amount of time to install a VM on that drive compared to installing an OS from a USB/DVD to an SSD.

 

[SeanFL]

have been using a half dozen 840's and a few 840 pros for a while...but haven't engaged rapid yet. Primary work is audio editing, occasional video. Any thoughts on if rapid might feel faster during editing, saving, etc.? System has 16 gigs. Also have an 840 pro on a laptop with 8 gigs of memory. Thanks for guidance.

Sean

 

[Z15CAM]

All I can say is F&*k Samsung Magician - Similar to ASUS AI Suite.

They are both CRAPPY software designed to take your money.

Suggest you look at the Intel IRST solution.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

All I can say is F&*k Samsung Magician - Similar to ASUS AI Suite.

They are both CRAPPY software designed to take your money.

Suggest you look at the Intel IRST solution.

Actually, I'm with jkauf on this one. It DOES depend on what sort of things you're doing, but I sometimes notice the difference over "no RAPID."

It's an old and established technique in dealing with the hardware pyramid. The old and established technique is built into your Intel processors as a design feature. The only real difference: the technique is applied through RAPID to a slower and lower level in the pyramid in conjunction with the next fastest storage component below parts of the processor: the RAM. It's not that much different than the cache component of HDDs, which we always sought for the larger cache spec.

Now. Some people will say they feel the difference; other people will say it's a gimmick. I happen to think "there's a difference." But the most important factor in using RAPID (or Primo-Cache, or Super-Cache) -- is this:

Is it rock-solid as a piece of software? Does it cause any instability or problem whatsoever?

I've worked with all three of those programs so far, and continuously for reasonably long periods. They haven't caused any trouble whatsoever.

 

[Cerb]

have been using a half dozen 840's and a few 840 pros for a while...but haven't engaged rapid yet. Primary work is audio editing, occasional video. Any thoughts on if rapid might feel faster during editing, saving, etc.? System has 16 gigs. Also have an 840 pro on a laptop with 8 gigs of memory. Thanks for guidance.

Sean

Maybe. Not much, if any, though. RAPID takes some of your RAM for write caching, not merely read caching. As a former accidental DBA, I believe I have become sufficiently jaded with storage technology to consider such techniques, beyond the conservative efforts of most OSes, to be playing with fire.

Does the OS in the VM install in like 5 minutes?

I don't get it...OS installation is usually CPU-bound, IME, regardless of how long it takes (it usually takes longer to answer the wizard than to do the install, unless it's also downloading the latest packages as part of the installation). I've noticed only very slight improvements from HDD to SSD, personally, since OS installs are mostly simple large writes. Using VMs for IO-intensive tasks, and performing package installs and updates, once the OS is up and running, however, are much faster with SSDs, since that tends to include a lot of small random writes. But, IME, it goes back to CPU limits fairly quickly, most of the time. That said, I've never had under 100GB free on my SSDs for more than maybe 10 minutes, which could make a difference.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Maybe. Not much, if any, though. RAPID takes some of your RAM for write caching, not merely read caching. As a former accidental DBA, I believe I have become sufficiently jaded with storage technology to consider such techniques, beyond the conservative efforts of most OSes, to be playing with fire.

So we were both "accidental DBAs." But again -- that's my point in my previous post.

Excluding Magician, the other two softwares I mentioned offer server versions. But you're also correct: What sort of hardware, components and software are you going to pick for running the San Onofre nuclear power-plant? What are you going to choose for hospital ER systems? There was a time when Intel was actually sued for a glitch in a processor which caused cumulative errors in the Operations Research model used in constructing a large building.

For workstations -- end-users -- like I said, you can pick your poison. If you think it helps, the issue then focuses on the stability and reliability of the software, and I gave my pontifications. If you don't think it helps, buy a couple MX100's, validate whether TRIM is operational in a RAID0 array, and be my guest. Two (or three or four . . ) are going to cost a lot more than a single 840/850/Pro/EVO with the software, or an MX100 and a license to Primo-/Super-cache.

Just as a footnote, and people have heard enough of it. The laptop options weren't too great when I retired, and as I retired -- I did not travel much or need a laptop. I deferred my "wireless experience" for a long time, even though I'd installed the wireless component of a LAN in an small office and done some other tweaks.

So I finally acquired a C2D-era "executive" laptop -- maybe six years old!! I got out my PHillips screwdriver immediately. Replaced the mini-PCIe NIC with a wireless N, replaced the WD Blue HDD with an MX100. So? Nothing too stunning at that point.

Then, I replaced the 2x1GB SO-DIMM RAMs with a bargain pair of 2x4GB. What can you really use 8GB of RAM for on a C2D laptop with "bidnis applications?"

We-ull, Pil-grim! Lemme tell ya! That old laptop had an SATA-II controller, so the SATA-III SSD was bottlenecked to <= 300 MB/s sequential read-rate.

DO you WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS NOW?!!

1,200+ MB/s. And -- AND! -- the 4K random read rate -- a slug-rating for HDDs in 2 digits and still only 50+ MB/s for an SSD [edit: ] on an SATA-II interface-- it's 250 MB/s!!

And THAT's the way you turn an old slug of a laptop into a "snappy" performer. the 4K read-rate tells all.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Z15CAM: Check your PM's. I'll post in a couple minutes from now.

 

[Cerb]

Then, I replaced the 2x1GB SO-DIMM RAMs with a bargain pair of 2x4GB. What can you really use 8GB of RAM for on a C2D laptop with "bidnis applications?"

Outlook and Excel, without being a techie, can easily get you there. I have been amazed at how much people try to do with those two programs. Personally, I found 8GB to be stifling by the time the calendar rolled over to 2013, and 2-4GB PCs often annoyingly slow.

We-ull, Pil-grim! Lemme tell ya! That old laptop had an SATA-II controller, so the SATA-III SSD was bottlenecked to <= 300 MB/s sequential read-rate.

DO you WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS NOW?!!

1,200+ MB/s. And -- AND! -- the 4K random read rate -- a slug-rating for HDDs in 2 digits and still only 50+ MB/s for an SSD [edit: ] on an SATA-II interface-- it's 250 MB/s!!

Except that it really isn't >1.2GBps. Instead of a benchmark program being able to tell Windows to ignore what's cached, it can't, so it gives scores as high as if it were benchmarking through a cache, rather than bypassing cache. A RAID controller with a cache will offer the same kinds of results, and be fragile outside of a few benchmarks, too.

Extra caching can work, but you have to be in the right use niche for it to be more than a negligible benefit, much like finding AMD's FX CPUs better than Intel's Cores. Because, not only must you be using storage the right way, but also be slowed down by it on a regular basis, with non-random accesses. And then it takes some RAM that could be used for other things, and delays writes further. Meanwhile, most new SSDs, unless you get the tiniest models, and be expected to handle 50K+ IOPS, and rarely reach 1ms.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Outlook and Excel, without being a techie, can easily get you there. I have been amazed at how much people try to do with those two programs. Personally, I found 8GB to be stifling by the time the calendar rolled over to 2013, and 2-4GB PCs often annoyingly slow.

That is absolutely true. The problem with spreadsheet programs or their older versions: they may likely load an entire data file at once.

I was in the political-club "business" for a few years, specifically as Treasurer. We wanted to communicate with "our base" in the county, and acquired the voter registration data specific to our party from the County Registrar. Trying to load that list into an Excel spreadsheet with a 2007 or earlier version was a failure and disaster. And it wasn't just the amount of memory -- it was the program's own limitation!

Except that it really isn't >1.2GBps. Instead of a benchmark program being able to tell Windows to ignore what's cached, it can't, so it gives scores as high as if it were benchmarking through a cache, rather than bypassing cache. A RAID controller with a cache will offer the same kinds of results, and be fragile outside of a few benchmarks, too.

Extra caching can work, but you have to be in the right use niche for it to be more than a negligible benefit, much like finding AMD's FX CPUs better than Intel's Cores. Because, not only must you be using storage the right way, but also be slowed down by it on a regular basis, with non-random accesses. And then it takes some RAM that could be used for other things, and delays writes further. Meanwhile, most new SSDs, unless you get the tiniest models, and be expected to handle 50K+ IOPS, and rarely reach 1ms.

That also is true, but the difference, especially with an old SATA controller, is quite stark.

I had also tested Primo-Cache from Romex Software on a system with a 320GB WD Blue drive. The benchies are certainly not close at all to what you'd expect with an SSD, but after working with the same programs and data for a while, you had a much-improved experience with less of the "hourglass."

Then, there's this feature in Primo-Cache that provides an "L2" capability: this is similar to ISRT SSD-caching. You add a 60GB (or bigger) SSD to the mix, which caches a large hard disk. You are then caching the SSD data to RAM.

I don't like inserting complexity into the situation, so I'm not that enthused about "L2" prospects, even though it might work quite well. Criticisms of that program had insisted that it wasn't "block-level caching," but --indeed -- it is.

On "wasting good RAM," I think we'd established that 8GB for current-gen (going back to Nehalem) was perfectly adequate. I've found that 16GB gives me more than I need. So -- IF THE CACHING SOFTWARE IS PERFECTLY STABLE -- it's a good way to use that extra RAM.

 

[Z15CAM]

On "wasting good RAM," I think we'd established that 8GB for current-gen (going back to Nehalem) was perfectly adequate. I've found that 16GB gives me more than I need. So -- IF THE CACHING SOFTWARE IS PERFECTLY STABLE -- it's a good way to use that extra RAM.

Agree - I will load a RAMDisk Image (Say 2 to 6 GB's from 16GB's of RAM) caching every Win and Application temp files I can find and that includes Win Event Logs - Anything to prevent Win from writing to the OS SSD Partition and that includes any SSD partition - (Save Writes - Right and Flushes every time you Re-Boot ;o)

I place all my Personal Files, Pagefile and Indexing on a HDD - Insuring nothing writes to the OS SSD Partiton and in that way you save all your personal Info if the SSD fails - Suggest you back your OS and Personal Files to another Bootable HDD or Thumb GHOST Image.

The biggest problem I've encountered is that Samsung Magician does NOT support Intel RAID. I use RAID-O for a Playground Partition so that leaves only 2 other AHCI none raid members in Sata RAID Mode and Samsung refuses to support Intel RAID Mode.

This does not mean that Samsung SSD's do not respond to TRIM in RAID if Intel IRST Drivers are loaded or for a none Sata RAID Member but their software doesn't.

I've only got 4 Intel ACHI/RAID Modes on my ASUS P8Z68V-Pro Gen 3 but newer MB's may have more. I would like 6 or more. Granted you can enable ASMedia for more controllers but it eats up your IRQ's which can lead to Driver/Bios IRQ Conflicts.

MS Diskpart will easily prepare or wipe any SSD for re-writing(Loading) with numerous partitions and a Russian app named "TRIM Check Tool" wil confirm if TRIM is working when you mount an SSD as a RAID Member or None Raid Member on a Sata Controller providing you load the latest MS IRST Driver - I'm referring to Intel Controllers here - I doubt if Samsung will not support Intel Raid that they will NOT support another RAID Controller ;o)

If you run any sort of RAID incorporating their SSD's, Samsung Magician and all their software is CRAP - Wake up Samsung.

Again granted Samsung Magician will probably work just fine using their Magician Rapid Storage Software with their SSD's mounted in Intel ACHI Mode but forget Intel RAID Mode, whether or not, their SSD's is or is not a Member of a RAID Array mounted on any form of a RAID Controller.

If things have changed in the lat year let me know.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Granted you can enable ASMedia for more controllers but it eats up your IRQ's which can lead to Driver/Bios IRQ Conflicts.

Heh! You found that out, too, did ya?!!

I doubt if Samsung will not support Intel Raid that they will NOT support another RAID Controller ;o)
If you run any sort of RAID incorporating their SSD's, Samsung Magician and all their software is CRAP - Wake up Samsung.
Again granted Samsung Magician will probably work just fine using their Rapid Storage Software with their SSD's mounted in Intel ACHI Mode but forget RAID Mode, whether or not, their SSD's is or is not a Member of a RAID Array.

If you say TRIMCheck proves TRIM operation for RAID disks, it's good to hear.

After having an ISRT configuration for so long, I went further to simplify everything. I disabled my Asmedia controller and the eSATA controller (until I ever think it's going to be needed.)

I might have tried RAID0 with SSD's, but they're so fast anyway, I changed over to AHCI-mode. It's true that Samsung Magician only offers its features with AHCI-mode.

If you're short on SATA-III ports, you can get a PCI-E x2 card that would fit that third PCI-E x16 (x4) slot. I found them for about $80 with Marvell controllers. They will default (without any BIOS configuration) to AHCI, and will use the native MSAHCI driver. At least, with the Z68 boards, we have the PCI-E 2.0 standard, and that should be ample.

 

[poohbear]

All I can say is F&*k Samsung Magician - Similar to ASUS AI Suite.

They are both CRAPPY software designed to take your money.

Suggest you look at the Intel IRST solution.

uhm, the software is free with with the SSD. They're not charging extra for it, so what are u on about?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

uhm, the software is free with with the SSD. They're not charging extra for it, so what are u on about?

Technically speaking, that's true. But we have to recognize the price-differential between Samsung's 840-Pro 512GB SSD and Crucial's 512GB MX100: At the Egg today, the Samsung is $380 and the Crucial is $210.

Keep in mind, this is simply a single observation among a population of resellers, so we'd want to take a sample and compute an average price-difference.

If you wanted a "software feature" for a Crucial MX100 that didn't offer it from the manufacturer, you'd get something like Primo-Cache with a license of $30-per-seat or per-PC. As limited as a single observation might be -- barring access to Samsung's cost-accounting and marketing databases -- this means a net difference of $140 in today's price.

We can only speculate whether this "massaged" number owes itself to the Egg, to Samsung, to Samsung trying to reap profit from a software feature, or just aggressive pricing by Crucial. Maybe it's Egg's slow response to "market-recognition" or the momentum of Samsung popularity.

And you can "think about it" some more. For $420+tax/shipping, you can get two such MX100's while it would cost you $760 for two 840-Pros of the same size. So you could have RAID0 for only ~56% of the price. You might want a BIOS update and a TrimCheck download to assure TRIM operation, but that puts a different perspective on things.

After that, I'm pretty sure you could spend another $30 for the Primo-Cache license and cache your RAID0 array . . . . if you wanted to -- that is. Samsung requires AHCI mode for Magician's RAPID; I'm pretty sure Primo-Cache doesn't. Primo can cache several drives at once; you can't even use RAPID for two 840-Pro's at the same time.

I'm just happy for my 840-Pro in AHCI, and the rock-solid stability of the Magician software. I think I paid at least $100 more for my Pro in January than it costs now. If the MX100 had been available then, I might have bought one instead. On the other hand, everyone was so "rave" about the 840-Pro -- who knows what I might have done?