Understanding raid 0 SSD help pls

[Claudius-07]

So I currently have a motherboard that does not support any sort of raid. Not only but it does not have SATA 6 either. I have 2 OCZ agility 3 drives which I wish to set as my primary OS in raid 0. If I use my current setup my SATA 3 motherboard, then within windows 7, in the admin settings I can stripe 2 drives using Windows... As it sees 2 drives of the same size and it seems to create some sort of raid with the 2 drives.

Can someone please explain to me what is the difference between setting up the raid array within win 7 using those options compared to say moving up to a board that "physically" supports raid through board? In other words is there any benefit to get a board that supports raid 0 natively vs the OS windows 7 version?

 

[FishAk]

One thing about Windows RAID is that if anything happens to Windows... well, I think you loose the array.

Consider buying a cheap RAID card. It will still be just software RAID, but it wouldn't rely on the OS.

 

[Zargon]

One thing about Windows RAID is that if anything happens to Windows... well, I think you loose the array.

Consider buying a cheap RAID card. It will still be just software RAID, but it wouldn't rely on the OS.

as of atleast 08 R2 I don't believe that is true, as it stores everything as plan data, so you can remove a drive, un raid it, and use the data.

if you get a cheap raid card, you are dependent on that cheap ass raid card, that you might not be able to find next year when it craps out

 

[nanaki333]

One thing about Windows RAID is that if anything happens to Windows... well, I think you loose the array.

Consider buying a cheap RAID card. It will still be just software RAID, but it wouldn't rely on the OS.

you do not.

i agree though, buying a cheap raid card will allow you to easily move and manage the array better. even using onboard intel raid would be better than windows raid. you can move a raid array from a c2d machine to a new SB and it'll pick up just fine.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Pretty sure that Windows Server's built-in RAID only allows for RAID-1 with the boot drive. Not RAID-0.

 

[FishAk]

you do not.

I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but I don't know how you recover a striped array across a couple drives when you lose the controller. My understanding is that Windows is the controller if you use Windows RAID.

I have never used it, and don't know how it works. I suppose it probably doesn't matter much, since anyone using RAID 0 would have a backup plan, right? I suppose that same line of thinking would include a cheep card crapping out...

 

[nanaki333]

I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but I don't know how you recover a striped array across a couple drives when you lose the controller. My understanding is that Windows is the controller if you use Windows RAID.

I have never used it, and don't know how it works. I suppose it probably doesn't matter much, since anyone using RAID 0 would have a backup plan, right? I suppose that same line of thinking would include a cheep card crapping out...

oh, you just said raid array. like larry said, you can't use software raid0 or raid5 on the OS "array". sorry for the confusion

 

[Zargon]

Pretty sure that Windows Server's built-in RAID only allows for RAID-1 with the boot drive. Not RAID-0.

good point

 

[Claudius-07]

ok I think i am just going to get a raid card... or heck I might just not mess with the stupid RAID altogether. These SSD's are so bloody fast as it is.
Cheers

 

[nanaki333]

i'm on my second set of intel drives in raid0 and yeah... you really don't notice a difference. it's just e-peen really.

 

[groberts101]

i'm on my second set of intel drives in raid0 and yeah... you really don't notice a difference. it's just e-peen really.

really? I don't even like to boot from my V3 compared to my 6 drive V2 array. Everything except booting is more snappy and the system cannot be bogged down no matter what I do all at once. Got all the e-PEEN stuff out of my system early on(when config testing) and only really care about transfer speeds and real usage experience.

Even the wife asks me to boot the array when she's working with pics as it's so noticeable. And she doesn't even know what a benchmark is.

The best thing I like about raid is the fact that capacity = write stamina for any SSD volume. The added low end grunt from those extra channels is just the icing on the cake.

 

[nanaki333]

i don't do any of that stuff. i seriously just browse the web and watch movies/tv episodes on my computer. every once in awhile, i'll play a game, but it's really rare. i have a 256GB m4 devoted to steam. my main os is on intel 320 160GB raid0 drives.

 

[grimpr]

The best thing I like about raid is the fact that capacity = write stamina for any SSD volume. The added low end grunt from those extra channels is just the icing on the cake.

Thanks for the wisdom groberts101...How the V2s behave under your array?, does the Garbage Collection/Durawrite works if under idle/logon screen?

 

[adamantinepiggy]

Having banchmarked 2 through 4 SSD's setup as RAID0, and RAID1 using the built-in Win7 pure software built-in RAID against Intel's RAID, Win7 built-in RAID is just as fast until you go past 3 drives, and even with 4, Intel's solution is just barely faster. Unfortunately, Win7 will only boot to a RAID1 mirror setup, otherwise, there would be no reason at all to use Intel's for a couple of SSD's. Both are relatively portable (E.G. you can yank the drives and put them in another Intel box and reasonably expect them to work agin.

As for actual operating speeds between a single fast SSD and RAID'd SSD's, the normal person would be hard pressed to tell a difference unless running benchmarks unless they are doing something "very" drive i/o intensive and more RAM is generally a more cost effective solution to any perceived OS responsiveness issues unless they know for sure they are disk or CPU i/o bound. A real RAID card (including Intels cheap solution) actually slows power-on boot times considerably since the card has to initialize itself along with the RAID/drives.

Basically, slow Hard Drive to fast SSD is a life-changer experience. Going from SSD to RAID'd SSD's is neat and fun, but you wont feel bad if you only had to use one SSD compared for example, to having to go back to a slow HD.

FYI: I'm running an Areca 1880ix caching SAS/SAT controller with 4 256GB SSD's in RAID0 and another 2 512GB SSD's in RAID 0. It's blazing fast, however I do understand I do it for fun and note that if I had to go back to non-RAID SSD's I wouldn't notice any difference in 99.9% of what I normally do with the PC.

 

[groberts101]

Thanks for the wisdom groberts101...How the V2s behave under your array?, does the Garbage Collection/Durawrite works if under idle/logon screen?

they are top-notch and consistent when maintained correctly.

GC works a bit on the slow side for the first gen SF controllers but I run that machine 24/7 and even when pushing lots of data?.. it gets plenty of recovery time.

The other thing that many don't know about these controllers is how good they are at data rotation and partial block consolidation. Kind of like a built in defrag more or less, since more free blocks are always better than less with an SSD.

 

[Emulex]

because ICH is software raid

 

[groberts101]

because ICH is software raid

not sure if that was @me or not.. but the internal algorithms of the Sandforce controller(aside from trim pass-through capability of the hardware) is no different when running off a card either. Consistent power supply and low activity(such as bios/logoff idling) is all that's required.