12/5/2023 0 Comments Raid 0 ssd benchmark![]() Snap! - 3D-Printed Salmon, Briefcase Scooter, Airless Tires, Free Hydrogen? Spiceworks Originalsįlashback: September 15, 1986: The Apple IIgs comes out, the last major product release in the Apple II series (Read more HERE.)īonus Flashback: September 15, 1941: Miroslaw 'M.I have a several 4TB 7200 laying around I could test, provided I had a decent raid hardware solution to even justify the test, but yeah, i guess in practice it still may not live up to the benefits of a real SSD's performance. The main program does run off an nvme 2TB as of now, upgraded from standard SSD just recently (no change in load times, mainly because the ortho is being pulled from that 7200 dynamic volume). My external raid box does the backing up of the dynamic volume, yep i'm aware its just a single drive in the dynamic state basically with no redundancy which is fine. Well its a sim not a game (sorry couldnt resist haha)įor ortho, which is satellite imagery, 16TB is not that far fetched, i have about 80% of the world covered. I dont own 16TB of data total.Īs for dynamic windows, that's not RAID or protection either, it s way of masking partitions under a single drive letter, one sits inside the other and the OS presents it as a single disk, but one is a folder in the other.Ĭould you install the game and main data to SSD and extra maps to HDD?Ī couple of these wouldn't hurt, but you need good cooling So i figured maybe 3-4 drives (4-6TB) each would boost things.Ĥ SATA HDD reading would only give you 480Mbs but it's not just reads, you are assuming reads are sequential, they may not be, HDD also have to move the head to a location on the platter to read the data, which introduces latency, an SSD doesn't have this issue either.ġ6TB for a game though is absurd, but if that's what you're in to. I do know from some quick trials off my smaller SSD drive that the 500MB/sec reads do benefit, so I was trying to come up with a cost effective way to handle 16TB at that read rate through some other method like raid0. SSD would probably cut load times in half, but isnt cost effective. Its only use is for flight sim ortho loading. So as far as protection thats covered (I use smartsync pro to occasionally sync the data which doesnt change that often) ![]() I actually have a raid enclosure for backup of the main 16TB drive which currently sits on two drives put in a dynamic windows setup (two 8TB 7200 rpm drives). With software RAID, I'd opt for at least a better RAID level than none.Īdding a hardware RAID controller if you plan to use RAID0 in my opinion is a waste of money, you are not gaining anything by adding this, other than a little increase perhaps, you still have the same data loss in a failure ![]() You either pay more and get less disks or have more disks and increase the usage in the case and ports required. If you have to go lower, I'd always have even number of disks and RAID10, with RAID0 and large capacity disks it's trouble in the making, complete data loss in the event a single disk fails, so unless you have backups or the data is not important, this is not a good idea.Ĭheapest and least amount of disks, you will only end up with one of the following - larger disks increase the cost, more disks increase the amount of spindle counts, contrary less disks in the first option and less cost in the second. 16TB requirement in what I can only assume is a home PC, given you said Asus motherboard, likely Intel RST - software RAID.Īlso with no redundancy, unless this is a scratch disk for video editing or something like this, I'd be getting 2 larger disks and using RAID1 as a minimumĢ x 10TB for 10TB usable (RAW) or 4 x 8GB in RAID10 for ~16TB RAW
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |