Time for a new SSD and RST Caching?

[Smartazz]

Hi all, I currently have a first gen Corsair 64GB SSD. It pulls a little over 200MB/s reads and about 150MB/s writes with HDtune reporting a .2ms response time. I've noticed that SSD prices have plummeted and this Corsair: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820233268 caught my eye. Those reads and writes are more than double my current SSD and it's SATA 6gb/s vs my current SSD which is SATA 3gb/s. Should I buy that 240GB Corsair and use my 64GB old SSD as a cache? Thanks in advance.

Edit: I forgot to ask if having an older SSD caching might be a disadvantage. If it would be, I'd move the old SSD to my laptop which has an 80GB 5400RPM drive that is horrendously slow.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

You don't need to use a separate drive as cache - you can just use, say, a 30GB partition on the new drive (since the point of a cache is to be fast...?)

I guess the obvious question is whether your system has a SATA III port to take advantage of the new drive. (If it's the rig in your signature, the answer is yes, but you know how it is.)

In which case your laptop would be getting a nice upgrade.

 

[Smartazz]

You don't need to use a separate drive as cache - you can just use, say, a 30GB partition on the new drive (since the point of a cache is to be fast...?)

I guess the obvious question is whether your system has a SATA III port to take advantage of the new drive. (If it's the rig in your signature, the answer is yes, but you know how it is.)

In which case your laptop would be getting a nice upgrade.

Yes, my current desktop has SATA III and the laptop is SATA II. From what I remember, isn't using a single drive as both a boot and a cache very tricky?

 

[KentState]

When I upgraded my SSD, I found that the old one was good for a temporary building ground for local VMs. I can do the install and configurations so much quicker and then move them to slower SATA drives when complete. I also keep a smaller VM on the SSD which is a sandbox for various VPN clients. Nothing like getting a call to log into a client and being able to fire it up instantly.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Yes, my current desktop has SATA III and the laptop is SATA II. From what I remember, isn't using a single drive as both a boot and a cache very tricky?

Dunno. Just read you could do it.

 

[sgrinavi]

What drive are you caching with the old Corsair 64?

 

[bryanW1995]

Yes, my current desktop has SATA III and the laptop is SATA II. From what I remember, isn't using a single drive as both a boot and a cache very tricky?

It's not that tough, the hardest part for me was figuring out how to install RAID drivers. I'll track down the thread link and post in case you're interested.

 

[Smartazz]

What drive are you caching with the old Corsair 64?

I want to use the P64 to cache my Steam games, which constitute most of my games. BF3 and some other programs I'll put on the primary SSD. The other option is putting the 64GB SSD into my Dell Studio laptop, but with 4GB of RAM and a 2.5GHz Core 2 Duo would still be very slow right?

 

[bryanW1995]

Here's the link to the SRT + Primary OS drive setup:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2172381

FYI, you can only use 18.6gb OR 64gb for cache if you go Primary OS + SRT on a single ssd. I ended up using the smaller 18.6gb, and I would probably recommend that you do that as well. If you go with the older ssd for cache then you can also use the complete ssd up to 64gb if you so wish.

That ssd would probably add some serious pop to your old laptop. If you use that laptop regularly then I would strongly recommend moving the ssd into it.

 

[Smartazz]

Here's the link to the SRT + Primary OS drive setup:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2172381

FYI, you can only use 18.6gb OR 64gb for cache if you go Primary OS + SRT on a single ssd. I ended up using the smaller 18.6gb, and I would probably recommend that you do that as well. If you go with the older ssd for cache then you can also use the complete ssd up to 64gb if you so wish.

That ssd would probably add some serious pop to your old laptop. If you use that laptop regularly then I would strongly recommend moving the ssd into it.

Thanks for the link. 240GB should be enough as a boot drive and cache drive right? Putting an SSD into that laptop is sounding very appealing. I feel like shelling out for an Ultrabook just isn't worth it. I've used the 11" and 13" MB Airs and the Acer Ultrabook and I don't know if I can justify such an expense. I just hope this Dell holds together after the warranty ends. It's almost four years old, but my last Dell laptop didn't last too long.

 

[bryanW1995]

I still have a dell with a c2d, only issue that I've had is that the battery has gotten really weak over time.

I used to run an 80gb x25m g2 with OS/Primary + an 18.6gb cache. I basically just put the OS on the Data ssd partition, and I put everything else on my 2tb wd green that was accelerated with the 18.6gb cache. It was awesome. The only reason I upgraded was that I really only needed the 2tb hdd to store my wife's photos, and I could put everything that I need on 2 x 256gb m4's.

 

[bryanW1995]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...Y?tag=at055-20

The first review listed has good info about what you should expect if you put the old ssd into your dell.

 

[Smartazz]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...Y?tag=at055-20

The first review listed has good info about what you should expect if you put the old ssd into your dell.

Thanks for the link. Sounds like a Core 2 Duo would still have some pep with an SSD. Granted a first generation Corsair SSD wouldn't hold a candle to the Crucial M4.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Scanned through the posts here. I actually logged in today to see what experiences people had had with the ISRT caching and acceleration in computer builds made with Z68 chipsets and later.

Yesterday I decided it was time to clone my boot-disk HDD with Acronis. I always do so choosing to impart the same NT signature to the clone, and had previously been careful to delete the backup drive's partitions on a different computer. I forgot to do so this time, and in fumbling around -- made the source boot drive "unbootable." Turns out that Windows 7 fixes this problem easily, but I actually misinterpreted the messages Windows had given me as indicating a problem with the ISRT caching, when that wasn't the case.

When I finally restored "boot-ability" to the HDD, I re-activated the SSD caching, and everything was wonderful again.

So . oooo . . . I see the OP is using an SATA-II SSD for caching.

I've found that the best possible configuration for an Intel controller with both SATA-III and SATA-II ports is as follows. Get a 60GB SATA-III SSD with good specs (like a sequential read-rate above 500 MB/sec). I use a Patriot Pyro.

You only need to use an SATA-II HDD or an SATA-III HDD plugged to an SATA-II port. In process of configuring ISRT, hook up the SSD to an SATA-III port.

You'll gain little or nothing with an SATA-III HDD connected to either type of port. The gain derives from having an SATA-III SSD connected to an SATA-III port of the controller.

You short yourself using an SATA-II SSD, even though it offers a significant improvement over standalone HDD performance.

I'll be interested to hear about all types of experiences with ISRT from others, but this configuration of mine has been rock-stable. The only troubles I ever experienced occurred when I first built it and attempted to use a 128GB Intel Elm Crest for caching while using the remainder of its space as a formatted partition. The system would hiccup about once a week.

You're best to use a drive no bigger than the maximum cache size under ISRT. MY best understanding for latest-gen motherboards and ISRT: those which followed the Z68 (X79?) allow the use of larger caches -- perhaps with no limitation on the size of the SSD.

 

[Diogenes2]

I would echo your experience.. The performance of the HDD is irrelevant.
The performance boost comes from the cached data being read from the SSD, and it approached the performance of a stand-alone SSD..

Unfortunately, X79 does not support SRT, but some MOBO's do have the Marvell controller with HyperDuo, which is better than HDD but not as fast as SRT ..

According to the Anand article last year " Intel limited the maximum cache size to 64GB as it saw little benefit in internal tests to making the cache larger than that.",
so I'm not sure what changes have been, or could be made to overcome that ..

With the price of SSD coming down, further development of SSD caching may be a dead end..