Go Back   Hardware Canucks > PC BUILDERS & TWEAKERS CORNER > Guides & How-to's

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:29 AM
MpG's Avatar
MpG MpG is offline
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 3,141
Default Latency Incurred By Raid 0?

Well, my googling attempts have come up blank, so I'm wondering if anyone else here has come across something useful. Basically, I'm fairly certain that I'll be making the SSD jump this Fall, and I'm also fairly certain that my budget is going to let me decide between a single SSD, or two half-size SSD's in RAID 0.

One little detail that I have yet to see addressed is the issue of latency incurred by having the drives striped. There are a million posts agreeing that it's "only logical" that there's a small amount of latency added, but I have yet to see or find one post where actual hard numbers are provided.

Anyone come across such material? Under ICH10R would be bonus, but I'd settle for anything right now.
__________________
i7 2600K | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 580GTX | Corsair DDR3-2133
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:34 AM
Safearus's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SSM, Ontario
Posts: 316
Default

Honestly I've not yet seen any actual numbers on this information yet either. However given the speed of an SSD drive I would assume that you'd not get major increases due to "unforseen" circumstances elsewhere. One thing to keep in mind is: Can your motherboard's NB and SB handle the data transfers speeds of two SSD drives simultaniously or will you get a major bottleneck scenario from this?
I'd rather go with one larger SSD. In most cases I assume that running two half-sizes in RAID0 will cause a bottleneck due to the sheer speed of an SSD drive. However if someone proves otherwise with numeric information I'll be surprized and buying two SSD drives
__________________
Current Rig: "Έρεβος" -- English: "Erebus" ::
ASUS R.O.G. Crosshair III 790FX
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.6 Ghz (Feck...)
Coolermaster Hyper 212+
Thermaltake Armor
Corsair TX850W
Mushkin HP3 2x2GB DDR3
Samsung SATA DVD-RW

MSI GeForce GTX 275 Twin Frozr
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:35 AM
"Quote This..."
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 3,828
Default

That would get picked up by any seek time benchmarks. The time between when an app requests data and when it receives it. Look at all the SSD benches around, even the ones on here and you see no measured difference in the seek times of Raid and non raid setups. Its probably in the order of nanoseconds. Or it's the exact same latency as non raid as they are both going through the same controller.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:38 AM
"Quote This..."
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 3,828
Default

Safearus, you hit a limit for your sata controller for sure, but that limit is 650mbs on the ich10 channel. I'm getting 3-60gb vertex's for Raid0, that will pretty much max out my sata bandwidth. They should be here today in fact, weeeee. I'll post benches.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:38 AM
Safearus's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SSM, Ontario
Posts: 316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeetard View Post
That would get picked up by any seek time benchmarks. The time between when an app requests data and when it receives it. Look at all the SSD benches around, even the ones on here and you see no measured difference in the seek times of Raid and non raid setups. Its probably in the order of nanoseconds. Or it's the exact same latency as non raid as they are both going through the same controller.
Hence "bottlenecking" due to the idea that you're technically slowing one or both of the SSD drives down quite a bit in the end. Again the reason I would stay with a single SSD.

EDIT:
You ninja'd that somethin fierce man!
I agree that it'll depend a ton on your controller, but even than for some systems other pieces may bottleneck it. And I hope to god it's not you're RAM or GPU
__________________
Current Rig: "Έρεβος" -- English: "Erebus" ::
ASUS R.O.G. Crosshair III 790FX
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.6 Ghz (Feck...)
Coolermaster Hyper 212+
Thermaltake Armor
Corsair TX850W
Mushkin HP3 2x2GB DDR3
Samsung SATA DVD-RW

MSI GeForce GTX 275 Twin Frozr

Last edited by Safearus; August 17, 2009 at 07:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:56 AM
MpG's Avatar
MpG MpG is offline
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 3,141
Default

Yeah, the ICH10R seems to bottleneck a little past the 600MB/s mark, so three is generally considered the max you'd want to put together like that. The benches that I've perused seem to suggest that the there isn't any meaningful hit on latency, but the absence of concrete info was bugging me. Nothing like having the info unavailable to make you more interested in it.

And could a mod please move this to the "Storage" subforum? IDK how the hell I posted it here.
__________________
i7 2600K | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 580GTX | Corsair DDR3-2133
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:58 AM
Safearus's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SSM, Ontario
Posts: 316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MpG View Post
And could a mod please move this to the "Storage" subforum? IDK how the hell I posted it here.

That was epic.
__________________
Current Rig: "Έρεβος" -- English: "Erebus" ::
ASUS R.O.G. Crosshair III 790FX
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.6 Ghz (Feck...)
Coolermaster Hyper 212+
Thermaltake Armor
Corsair TX850W
Mushkin HP3 2x2GB DDR3
Samsung SATA DVD-RW

MSI GeForce GTX 275 Twin Frozr
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 07:59 AM
"Quote This..."
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 3,828
Default

I wouldn't call it bottlenecking, 2 drives in raid O are never twice as fast as a single but they are close to it, more like overhead than a bottle neck.

Look at the raid O scores in the HWC reviews, raid O is wayyyy faster:

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...1&limitstart=7
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 08:02 AM
"Quote This..."
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hell
Posts: 3,828
Default

That said. The entire storage system of your PC is it's biggest bottleneck. Even at 65Ombs it's the slowest component.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old August 17, 2009, 08:05 AM
Safearus's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SSM, Ontario
Posts: 316
Default

So you've linked us with specific numerical information. This is basically what was orignially asked for, and now I need to save up and shell out more cash for 2x SSD drives. Look how expensive you're going to turn my budget system

EDIT: Ninja'd again!
__________________
Current Rig: "Έρεβος" -- English: "Erebus" ::
ASUS R.O.G. Crosshair III 790FX
AMD Phenom II X4 955 @ 3.6 Ghz (Feck...)
Coolermaster Hyper 212+
Thermaltake Armor
Corsair TX850W
Mushkin HP3 2x2GB DDR3
Samsung SATA DVD-RW

MSI GeForce GTX 275 Twin Frozr
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ESata dual raid enclosure = poor man's hardware raid? sswilson Storage 10 May 6, 2008 09:58 AM
Lowest Latency Firewire? Lyxtwing Audio 0 February 6, 2008 06:58 PM
What are the dangers of tweaking latency? +extra questions! mrlie3 RAM 5 December 4, 2007 06:59 PM
Forget High-Speed RAM- go for low latency and a 6xxi Babrbarossa RAM 9 March 31, 2007 04:12 PM
Legion revisits ddr2 performance: a look at latency using the 680i Babrbarossa Reviews & Articles from the Web 0 March 26, 2007 07:35 AM