The Mother of All SSD Drives

[MessiaaH]

Ok fellers, i jumpin in.

Good points were made all round, but the most important point is arcman own, them things are WAY too expensive, and d price is NOT falling quickly enouhg for my liking. Everything is relative, SSD performance is faster than HDs, but u have to compare similar components, and see d performance gain.

I've extensively reserached SSD ah while ago,t o see if it make sense, and it did not. D perfomrance for 2 VelociRaptors in RAID0 was better dan most ssd's on d market, only d rel expensive high end ones beat it, is 600+ US extra worth photoshop opening 5 seconds faster? lol , I think not. Dat guy TriniWyatt quoted about his speed increase, he coming from ah RAID10 to SSD? he is ah bamse, and knows nothing about raid. ill leave it at that. Moving on.

SSDs are an upper high end product, if all d rest of parts in yuh rig beast out, yes SSD is d way no question, just like ah Xtreme Intel chip, makes no sense spending 1000$ on dat, unless all yuh rest of parts up to scratch, and unles u intend to maximize d potential of said part.

IT will be MUCH more benificial, and cheaper, to buy ah high end GPU, dan ah SSD. If games performance is what u want, if Application performance is what u want, an faster processor. So on and so fort. RAID0 Raptor is d WIN for PCs right now, SSD only viable, if all yuh other parts done best out.

Also, SSD's may hit main stream in 3 years yes, but when they do, there will be HDs that out perform dem at cheaper, as it is now. SSDs need to reach d point, where dey beatin HDs at d same price. and dat my friends, is a long way off.

Dats my 2 cents (at this time i've sdd a second ssd reserach phase to see if it make sense fuh my upgraded rig, 980x/2nd 5970) ill never buy ah ssd before ah beter cpu/gpu.

[Crixx_Creww]

An area you may not be addressing messiah is laptops.

SSDS make a real difference in an area where 5400 rpm is king.

And while price is still bleh for most / all de drives.

On a laptop where your expected to work with less space but you also may be doing lots of real work on it, having an ssd could be a God Send... a messiah drive almost..

[Spazosaurus]

Sustained speeds in a raid config using conventional beasts like the velociraptor can match that of ssd's but the real advantage, where they cannot compare is in random access seek times which really shows its advantages when launching random applications and games.

There's simply no way hdd's can match that. For that reason alone i'll seriously consider getting a small ssd for boot, programs and games to replace my velociraptor before I buy another one to raid.

[MessiaaH]

Point on d laptops, thats where ssd will make, in d laptop segment, netbooks especially, where u looking fuh more perfromance whiles maintaining battery life. But fuh desktop use, i juss dont see ssd makin sense in desktops any time soon, and to respond to capt awsome, yea all that is true, but my initial statements still remains, it all boils down to, if it is worth it. to spend hundreads of dollors more, to open ah program faster. when i coudl spend much less, to play high end games, with max graphics. if ur cpu/gpu power is not at its limits, ssd makes no sense at all for desktops @ the current price dey going for.

[Spazosaurus]

Remember a 300gig VR is still $200us AT LEAST which isnt exactly cheap. As you know it was more expensive before the 600 came out, like $290 when I bought it 1.5yrs ago.

Double that amount to run raid0 and you're running into decent HARDCORE ssd territory.

[MessiaaH]

yes, veloci raptor is not cheap, but u getin rel space, i have 600GB of volciraptor spped in my machine, OS, all games, vmware, etc, etc, u know how much it go cost, to get 600gb ssd lolololol, not pretty atal, so if u watch ratpor, compare it point fuh point, 72gb raptor in raid is not expensive.

On another note, there are 2TB Drives going on amazon fuh 136$ US, lolol, bluray movies ppl , storage, spend yuh money there first, upgrade everything else fuss, ssd is d least benificial upgrade in ah PC imo.

Before anybody else post, please read carefully.

SSD ARE GOOD, BUT NOT AT D PRICE, u can benifit alot more, spending yuh money, behind a host of other hardware, compared to, ah few programs opening 5-10 seconds faster, on ah SSD.

[Arcmanov]

EGAD!!!  That SSD is expensive, but in the high-end space, where money is no object... *looks at firstchoicett*...I think one, or two of these would round out an already impressive config.

...but this is for people who buying/building PCs that costing OVER 5000 US.

[MessiaaH]

^^ YUP!

honestly, i dont know how firstchoice does do it, i have to upgrade my storage server, firstchoice, help ah brotha out. sponsor 4 2tb drives

[Spazosaurus]

Definitely still too expensive and money is better spent on other hardware before ssd...especially since battlefield load times drop by about 70% with new drivers...but if I had to spend ~ $900us on a drive for boot/application/games purposes, Intel was getting my money as opposed to a raid5 config.

[MessiaaH]

raid5? 900us? yuh loss meh

[phoenix31tt]

btw... raid5 should not be compared speedwise to anything eh... it is not built or designed for speed.. but for redundancy... raid0 is speed...

but... load times man?... 5 secs of ur game starting? i mean.. really? our machines load games @ what... 20 secs currently? i dunno but.. i dont see it worth it... i could get in  a good nice scratch with that excess 5 secs u know

if it helped my games and applications actually perform better.. i all for that...

[woodyear99]

having an ssd could be a God Send... a messiah drive almost..

Nice one 

[W1nTry]

Raid 5 is actually a mix that leverages performance on redundancy, so wihilst not as fast as RAID0 it's not as slow as RAID1 and gives a comfort level that RAID0 cannot. Personally if you can afford it, go RAID5. In the server environment RAID5 is king and that is considering its in tandem with SAS/SCSI driver @ 15k and a hardware controller. Either way, if you RAID5 SSD drives again performance is ridiculous. I don't know why anyone would go RAID0 save cost.

[MessiaaH]

in d server space, both raid0 and raid5 are used. RIAD0 is used for raw data access (OS), raid5 for storage. Which is duplicated in my rig.

RIAD0 Raptors for OS/GAMES, RAID5 For storage.

If one drive fails, on my RAID0 Array, who cares, i have an acronis backup, runnig to my cheap RAID5, raid 5 is where u want yuh bulk of data storage.
I wouldnt sacfice speed of my OS/Games to put raid5 there, all dem thing backing up to my Storage drive.

Its abolutely waste of money, to do raid5 with SSD, dat makes no sense atal, do RAID0, and take d money for d third SSD, and buy like 3 2tb drives, lol. back yuh raid0 up to dat, and u have TONS of storage fuh movies and thing as well.

[IsMe2003]

Well guys, just my to cents here, as I see one or to misconceptions being mentioned

RAID 5 is not exactly king in the server world, it all depends on your server application, RAID 5 actually has very poor random write performance (Slower than RAID0 and RAID1), which is why for database applications like SQL and Exchange, you use RAID 1 or 10 arrays, but incase you don’t believe me there is always Google  

As far as using RAID0 for your servers OS, that’s a no no , hopefully you meant to say RAID1 or RAID5 should be used for a server OS  , i dont think RAID0 belongs in the server world unless you dust of one of them old NT4 mcse books where they talking about using it for proxy server cache  

Now that that’s out the way, picking a RAID for your home machine really boils down to you, in my case I use RAID0 and a cheap 1 TB SATA drive for backup that I picked up for $60, performance/price wise this was the most effective for me and I got 600GB of space to use. Was not willing to go raid 5 as that’s an extra 300 bucks down the drain for a 3rd

As far as SSD drives on the desktop go, yeah it’s definitely the future, so is living on the moon and that nice Sony 3D to watch Monsters 3D on, but right now the $$$ you spend for the performance you gain not to mention usable space to launch an application 1 or 2 seconds faster does not make much sense to me at least. But like everything it’s a personal choice if you got the $$$ to put behind it, go for it, I would.

[Crixx_Creww]

Well guys, just my to cents here, as I see one or to misconceptions being mentioned

RAID 5 is not exactly king in the server world, it all depends on your server application, RAID 5 actually has very poor random write performance (Slower than RAID0 and RAID1), which is why for database applications like SQL and Exchange, you use RAID 1 or 10 arrays. I’m a trained SAN administrator so I know what I am talking about, but incase you don’t believe me there is always Google 

As far as using RAID0 for your servers OS, that’s a no no , hopefully you meant to say RAID1 or RAID5 should be used for a server OS  , i dont think RAID0 belongs in the server world unless you dust of one of them old NT4 mcse books where they talking about using it for proxy server cache 

Now that that’s out the way, picking a RAID for your home machine really boils down to you, in my case I use RAID0 and a cheap 1 TB SATA drive for backup that I picked up for $60, performance/price wise this was the most effective for me and I got 600GB of space to use. Was not willing to go raid 5 as that’s an extra 300 bucks down the drain for a 3rd

As far as SSD drives on the desktop go, yeah it’s definitely the future, so is living on the moon and that nice Sony 3D to watch Monsters 3D on, but right now the $$$ you spend for the performance you gain not to mention usable space to launch an application 1 or 2 seconds faster does not make much sense to me at least. But like everything it’s a personal choice if you got the $$$ to put behind it, go for it, I would.

lol @ iam a trained SAN administrator
Lots of us here , in this very thread, are also experts, so no need to qualify your statements with stuff like that.
Just talk yuh sense

[IsMe2003]

Well guys, just my to cents here, as I see one or to misconceptions being mentioned

RAID 5 is not exactly king in the server world, it all depends on your server application, RAID 5 actually has very poor random write performance (Slower than RAID0 and RAID1), which is why for database applications like SQL and Exchange, you use RAID 1 or 10 arrays. I’m a trained SAN administrator so I know what I am talking about, but incase you don’t believe me there is always Google 

As far as using RAID0 for your servers OS, that’s a no no , hopefully you meant to say RAID1 or RAID5 should be used for a server OS  , i dont think RAID0 belongs in the server world unless you dust of one of them old NT4 mcse books where they talking about using it for proxy server cache 

Now that that’s out the way, picking a RAID for your home machine really boils down to you, in my case I use RAID0 and a cheap 1 TB SATA drive for backup that I picked up for $60, performance/price wise this was the most effective for me and I got 600GB of space to use. Was not willing to go raid 5 as that’s an extra 300 bucks down the drain for a 3rd

As far as SSD drives on the desktop go, yeah it’s definitely the future, so is living on the moon and that nice Sony 3D to watch Monsters 3D on, but right now the $$$ you spend for the performance you gain not to mention usable space to launch an application 1 or 2 seconds faster does not make much sense to me at least. But like everything it’s a personal choice if you got the $$$ to put behind it, go for it, I would.

lol @ iam a trained SAN administrator
Lots of us here , in this very thread, are also experts, so no need to qualify your statements with stuff like that.
Just talk yuh sense

so which parts was none sence in my post expert? because i say i a san admin? i did not lash out personally at anybody or was trying to imply anything

take your own advice next time before you post nonsense fellah.

[Crixx_Creww]

Well guys, just my to cents here, as I see one or to misconceptions being mentioned

RAID 5 is not exactly king in the server world, it all depends on your server application, RAID 5 actually has very poor random write performance (Slower than RAID0 and RAID1), which is why for database applications like SQL and Exchange, you use RAID 1 or 10 arrays. I’m a trained SAN administrator so I know what I am talking about, but incase you don’t believe me there is always Google 

As far as using RAID0 for your servers OS, that’s a no no , hopefully you meant to say RAID1 or RAID5 should be used for a server OS  , i dont think RAID0 belongs in the server world unless you dust of one of them old NT4 mcse books where they talking about using it for proxy server cache 

Now that that’s out the way, picking a RAID for your home machine really boils down to you, in my case I use RAID0 and a cheap 1 TB SATA drive for backup that I picked up for $60, performance/price wise this was the most effective for me and I got 600GB of space to use. Was not willing to go raid 5 as that’s an extra 300 bucks down the drain for a 3rd

As far as SSD drives on the desktop go, yeah it’s definitely the future, so is living on the moon and that nice Sony 3D to watch Monsters 3D on, but right now the $$$ you spend for the performance you gain not to mention usable space to launch an application 1 or 2 seconds faster does not make much sense to me at least. But like everything it’s a personal choice if you got the $$$ to put behind it, go for it, I would.

lol @ iam a trained SAN administrator
Lots of us here , in this very thread, are also experts, so no need to qualify your statements with stuff like that.
Just talk yuh sense

so which parts was none sence in my post expert? because i say i a san admin? i did not lash out personally at anybody or was trying to imply anything

take your own advice next time before you post nonsense fellah.

lol look at man beating up his chest for no reason
i didnt say anything was nonsense
i said you dont need to qualify your statements by saying your a trained SAN administrator
just talk your sense, meaning, just say what you have to say on the matter, no need to think you need to post qualifications.
If you talking sense, men will recognize as such.

Hmm @ telling me i post nonsense though, meh if i was in a better mood i would have construed that as an insult/attack at me. Whatevs
Forza Inter

[MessiaaH]

err, sense nonsense, attack, sinsult, lol, is ah dam tech forum, and we is all trinis, if ah man talking shit, tell d man he talking shit, he go learn something and be better off for it, d constured insult/attack level on dis forum rel high, Inchigo Second level to d hollow mask high. lol

[IsMe2003]

Well guys, just my to cents here, as I see one or to misconceptions being mentioned

RAID 5 is not exactly king in the server world, it all depends on your server application, RAID 5 actually has very poor random write performance (Slower than RAID0 and RAID1), which is why for database applications like SQL and Exchange, you use RAID 1 or 10 arrays. I’m a trained SAN administrator so I know what I am talking about, but incase you don’t believe me there is always Google  

As far as using RAID0 for your servers OS, that’s a no no , hopefully you meant to say RAID1 or RAID5 should be used for a server OS  , i dont think RAID0 belongs in the server world unless you dust of one of them old NT4 mcse books where they talking about using it for proxy server cache  

Now that that’s out the way, picking a RAID for your home machine really boils down to you, in my case I use RAID0 and a cheap 1 TB SATA drive for backup that I picked up for $60, performance/price wise this was the most effective for me and I got 600GB of space to use. Was not willing to go raid 5 as that’s an extra 300 bucks down the drain for a 3rd

As far as SSD drives on the desktop go, yeah it’s definitely the future, so is living on the moon and that nice Sony 3D to watch Monsters 3D on, but right now the $$$ you spend for the performance you gain not to mention usable space to launch an application 1 or 2 seconds faster does not make much sense to me at least. But like everything it’s a personal choice if you got the $$$ to put behind it, go for it, I would.

lol @ iam a trained SAN administrator
Lots of us here , in this very thread, are also experts, so no need to qualify your statements with stuff like that.
Just talk yuh sense

so which parts was none sence in my post expert? because i say i a san admin? i did not lash out personally at anybody or was trying to imply anything

take your own advice next time before you post nonsense fellah.

lol look at man beating up his chest for no reason
i didnt say anything was nonsense
i said you dont need to qualify your statements by saying your a trained SAN administrator
just talk your sense, meaning, just say what you have to say on the matter, no need to think you need to post qualifications.
If you talking sense, men will recognize as such.

Hmm @ telling me i post nonsense though, meh if i was in a better mood i would have construed that as an insult/attack at me. Whatevs
Forza Inter

alright alright, it to early to get we draws all in a bunch (Your beat up chest comment was funny though  ), look ah edit the post to remove that bit as i see your point, so lets kiss and make up now 

i know yua go take it out on meh as i jsut buy BC2 and want to join the sweet, my roll will be plaign the dead guy