Z68 SSD Caching Questions

[jah1subs]

I have a conservative scenario for building a Z68 based system and then a couple of steps in using it. I am already thinking of using the Intel SSD 311. The scenario has the following steps:
1. Build system without SSD to get it running sooner rather than later (budget).
2. Add SSD and switch on SSD caching.
3. Transfer system to another family member who would have a somewhat different mix of applications.

Questions
1. Are there any glitches that I should watch for when adding an SSD with caching some time (several months?) after starting to use the system?
2. Should I expect the system to be faster or slower (after the SSD caching is installed) than it would have been if I had just bought the SSD cache and installed it during the initial build?
3. If the other family member uses a different mix of applications will the system adapt to that different usage, if so, will it be pretty quickly? I believe that the answer to this question is that it will adapt quickly but I am wondering if anyone here has actually done this.

Thank you in advance.

 

[Ozzu]

I just set up a Z68 system with that exact SSD for caching. It works like a champ.

Anyways, I do believe it'll just purge the old cache as new cache space is needed. So, over time, all the info that you have cached on there would be gone and be replaced by their stuff. They wouldn't notice any difference in useage than if they had gotten a totally new SSD.

 

[jah1subs]

If you had set up the system for caching originally but not included the Intel SSD 311, would you expect the system to begin to speed up as soon as the cache is added?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

If you had set up the system for caching originally but not included the Intel SSD 311, would you expect the system to begin to speed up as soon as the cache is added?

Go find the Bjorn-3d review site and look for a review -- probably for the ASUS P8Z68-V-Pro. Same chipset. I'm pretty sure it's Bjorn-3D. They ran a whole battery of benchies on an inexpensive mainstreamer HDD and an SSD that was only 20GB -- the minimum cache size for ISRT. Check out the graphs. There's a brief learning curve for the caching that . . . basically . . . looks like a learning curve as it moves to the HDD-only performance toward the SSD's performance level.

You should be able to expect an "equilibrium" -- a "steady-state" -- of performance that is about 3/4 that of the SSD. That's why I have to say -- for myself, but to others: Trading off cost, electrical bill and performance, this beats running 4-drive RAID5 (with no SSD caching) on all three counts, and most profoundly in the performance issue.

Suppose you bought a Veloci-Raptor SATA-III to use with a good performing SSD SATA-III? It would have a steeper learning curve, but it would stlll only approach the performance of the SSD a little closer. The way I understand it, while you can SSD-cache a RAID array, a single mainstreamer drive or the WD VelociRaptor. You could choose to cache an SATA-II (TWO) Samsung F3 instead of current-gen models. You would still get an improvement of performance closer to the SSD's simple benchmarks.

 

[jah1subs]

BonzaiDuck: Thank you for the pointer to the Bjorn3d article.

You were right in that it was about the ASUS P8Z68-V-Pro. I see what you mean about the learning curve. Also, now that I have seen the written description of the process for setting up SSD caching, I will probably want to install it when I build the system, not later.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

BonzaiDuck: Thank you for the pointer to the Bjorn3d article.

You were right in that it was about the ASUS P8Z68-V-Pro. I see what you mean about the learning curve. Also, now that I have seen the written description of the process for setting up SSD caching, I will probably want to install it when I build the system, not later.

I'm in contact with an Intel "customer-support rep" named Nathalie. She's been quite good with answers, and I've been "breaking bad" with more questions precipitated by her answers. But last e-mail, I posed a few questions to her, and I think we were discussing the Larson Creek 20GB 311-series SSD above?

She noted that the Larson Creek SSD was "meant for the ISRT HDD acceleration." But I responded with observation that it had half the sustained or sequential-read performance of the Elm Crest 510 series (which only comes in 120GB and higher flavors) -- being that the Larson Creek was an SATA-II SSD versus SATA-III . .

I asked her to comment on my assumption that the faster throughput was better, but I also asked how an SLC SSD (like Larson Creek) would be better for ISRT acceleration than an MLC like Elm Crest.

Another assumption of mine: "the bigger the cache-size, the better the performance even for decreasing marginal improvements asymptotic to the SSD standalone performance benchies."

Finally -- "Will Intel increase the maximum SSD cache size (64GB) in the future?"

I'll report back if she responds to my questions to her answer to my questions . . .

Meantime . . . I CAN'T FREAKIN' BE-LEEVE this thing!! ALL the BOTTLENECKS I'd taken for granted over 29 years of micro-computing, information system techno-ob-SESS-ion!! WIPED . . . FREAKIN' . . . AWAY!! [Scuse me . . . I've gotta getta grip . . . getta grip . . . ]

HEY !! And figure THIS! I finally found the Larson Creek at the Egg. I don't think it's exactly priced proportionate to its size. But these motherboards come with a combination of ICH SATA-III and SATA-II sockets. Even the high-end of the ASUS P8Z68 -- the Deee-LUCKS -- sticks you with two SATA-III ports and maybe four SATA-II.

Are you going to cache your MPG HBO-Movie captures through the SSD that also speeds up your operating system? NO!! Caching or no caching, you're better to have TV-capture writes and reads off a separate hard drive. But then, what would be wrong with caching that second drive, even an SATA-II?

There are all sorts of possible strategies with this, since you can pair more than one SSD with a respective HDD. Where do you need or want to open a bottleneck a little wider? How much is it worth? Do you feel like [Eastwood] Dirty Harry? Well do ya?

"This is the most powerful computer in the world . . . and it will blow your head clean off . . . Do you feel lucky? . . . . "

 

[Chaoticlusts]

BonzaiDuck: Thank you for the pointer to the Bjorn3d article.

You were right in that it was about the ASUS P8Z68-V-Pro. I see what you mean about the learning curve. Also, now that I have seen the written description of the process for setting up SSD caching, I will probably want to install it when I build the system, not later.

Actually setting it up later shouldn't be a problem in the slightest and shouldn't affect performance gains at all either. Obviously programs will have to load at HDD speed the first time before they get cached and benefit from the SSD but that applies regardless of when you install it

The only thing you have to be wary of is make absolutely certain the HDD your setting things up on is configured in your BIOS as RAID before you install windows otherwise you won't be able to attach an SSD later without a reinstall

technically whether you put the drive in right away or later no matter what your starting the caching after installing windows since the caching works via software installed after the windows installation so whether you do it 5 minutes after installing windows or 5 months won't really change things (though do defrag the HDD and such before you cache it if it is 5 months just so it's nicely optimised and such can't remember if there was a consensus reached as to whether defragging while cache is running is an issue or not)

as for your last question like the others said no it won't be an issue the cache learns so them switching programs will be the same as when the cache is first setup new programs will open at HDD speeds then get much faster

so basically yes if you'd like to set up your whole system now then attach a cache down the track there's no issue with that, in fact it's kinda what the tech was designed for (in that it allowed people to throw old SSD's at systems to speed them up)

 

[Ozzu]

The only thing you have to be wary of is make absolutely certain the HDD your setting things up on is configured in your BIOS as RAID before you install windows otherwise you won't be able to attach an SSD later without a reinstall

You speak the truth. I just went from an AMD system to a new i5 2500k system. Windows was perfectly fine with booting up and picking up all the new hardware. The issue was, that Windows install was setup while all my drives were set to AHCI. The moment I tried to get RAID going and get my cache set up, I got blue screens left and right.

I tried a few solutions that I saw online including a patch from Microsoft, but it was no go.

Oh well. I needed a fresh install of Windows anyway.

 

[Chaoticlusts]

Yeah I believe there are work arounds (involving reg-editing and such) but it's one of those things that your really better off doing a reinstall cause with a workaround you risk adding a bunch of instability even if you do get it booting and while a reinstall is a pain it's better than an unstable computer you just 'upgraded'