Ok so set the bios to AHCI for an SSD... Well i have a question then because i am about to upgrade to SSD and Windows 7...
What if... I want a SSD for my OS, and then to have two regular HDDs in RAID0 for like games and media? How would I go about this without setting bios to RAID? This baffles me
bump...
been asking on other forums, i figure this one will give me the answer
You want RAID but you don't want to set it up in BIOS? There is only one way, then... Set the RAID in Windows, use software RAID. The RAID in consumer motherboards are software too in general, RAID in hardware most of the time are the domain of quite expensive SAS interface cards. To tell you the truth, I don't use nor recommend to use RAID 0 for ANYTHING. The risk of losing data when either of disks died on you is just to great... Read this thread here: https://www.sevenforums.com/crashes-d...tml#post734306
zzz2496
If you want the boot drive to be an SSD and to use a RAID0 data array, and you want to use the motherboard's SATA controller for the array, you set the BIOS to RAID. The two HDs are configured in the RAID BIOS windows as part of an array, and the SSD is not.
I admit that I haven't done this on my own system. I tried a RAID10 array using an Intel controller a couple of years ago, but I gave it up after finding that the system wanted to re-verify the array after every system crash. (The PC was still usable during the scan, but the HD performance was poor.) If you must use RAID0 (no redundancy), I suggest frequent backups.
But, will the SSD achieve the same performance as if it were in AHCI... And, will TRIM still work in Windows7 if the BIOS is set to RAID?
I have several machines with RAID 5 and AHCI however you need two (2) controllers to do this. Go to your local computer store and buy a good SATA card for your machine plug in the SSD drive into it, set it as the boot drive and then you can RAID the two (2) HDDs. However I would not use RAID 0 on them. I would use RAID 1 (mirroring) so you have redundancy. If one drive goes bad you can replace it as well as still use your computer until you replace it without loss of data. (Note I would replace the failed drive as soon as possible).
...ahhh that will be difficult to do with the build i am going to be doing wednesday this week... I'm guessing the SATA cards are PCI cards? If they are then it'll be a no-go... I have an ASUS Rampage III coming on Wednesday...
Newegg.com - ASUS Rampage III Extreme LGA 1366 Intel X58 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
on that link you can see it has one regular PCI slot and 4 x16 PCI-E slots... I'll be using two PCI-E slots for my current two Sapphire hd5970s and one PCI slot for my current NIC card... the Killer NIC...
What type of SATA cards are available? Do they have PCI-E cards? and will they droup the thoroughput of my graphics cards to x8 if I use another PCI-E slot?
Killer NIC = Paper weight.
Computer internetworks is a network of devices, you have one very low latency device, it interfaces with a high latency router, you'd lose the "Killer advantage"... Here's the breakdown: Switch needs around 0.x ms to switch, which shows in ping (<1ms time), it's not 0ms, but very fast. A router needs around 0.x to X ms to route. A high class router can route as fast as 0.03 μs, load the router with rules and multiple protocols, it can go a bit higher... But still "wire speed" none the less. In consumer class hardware, let's say our broadband router, it has integrated switch (low priced, low speed, blocking), an Access point (low power, low speed, limited features), and a router (low routing speed, limited feature, limited processing power, limited firewall). You have a horrendously slow device between you and the internet. I say horrendously slow because your Killer NIC might have 0.2ms latency, your router will add another 6-8ms (maybe more), that's like 30-40 times slower... Add a port forwarding rule, port triggering, DMZ, packet filter, content censoring, and whatever your router have, it will add to the latency quite a bit, if you torture it with bittorrent connection (few hundred connection for each client), the latency will quickly add up to horrendously slow levels...
About the display adapter, I don't know about you, but I'd go with one HD5970 rather than 2, CF-X scaling is not that good, adding the second card (2 GPU) will add a lot of power/heat and not so much on performance. But I don't have any complaints in that area :)
If you really want a good SATA/SAS controller, a real RAID controller, I suggest these ones: Newegg.com - Adaptec 2267000-R PCI Express Low Profile Ready SATA / SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) RAID 5445Z Controller Card, Newegg.com - Adaptec 2258800-R PCI Express SATA / SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) 52445 Kit Controller Card, or Newegg.com - Adaptec 2258800-R PCI Express SATA / SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) 52445 Kit Controller Card.
Those will surely blow your onboard controller out of the water, literally...
zzz2496
Ps. Lose the NIC, use a good NIC with TOE engine...
first off i just gotta say, thank you all of you guys for putting your two cents in.... or in zzz2496's case, his two dollars and change in... hahaha
First off let me tell you guys how i'll be using my pc... It will be a high end gaming machine and it will be used for rendering and publishing videos to the internet... Alot of work will be done on it aswell... The main thing performance wise I want out of this pc is to be able to play the most current games (bfbc2 and the such) on high level graphic settings AND record the gameplay with FRAPS while still achieving atleast 60fps... This is a "way out there" goal... And i still have my doubts as to wether or not i'll be able to achieve this with my upgrade that's coming by wednesday...
My current build has a core2quad (q9300 45nm) clocked at 3.5ghz with 8Gb of G.Skill ddr2 1000 (PC2 8000) ram, and two WD 500gb caviar 7200 rpm hard drives (not in RAID 0).... I previously had a 4870hd, but I upgraded to two Saphire hd5970's... And I am using Windows Vista 64bit
Now, I know that two 5970's might be overkill, but i am at a loss for what is the culprit in the slowdown when i record video in-game... When gaming currently I achieve an average of 60fps on max settings and running an in-game resolution of 2560x1600... But when I hit the record button the framerate gets cut in half or worst...
Now, I'm thinking the main two culprits are the CPU, maybe the RAM, but mostly the hd write speed performance... I really don't know if RAID0 will help with write speed performance, or if recording uncompressed video to SSD's will increase the performance while recording...
What i'll be getting on wednesday is the new 6core cpu from intel... the core i7-980x... an Intel 80gb SSD (X25-M Mainstream).... And 8gb of DDR3 2200 (PC317600) ram...
Their are reason's I made these choices for parts... When I run 3dmark Vantage currently, obviously the 3d card score is double that of the CPU score... So my mind tells me that the 5970 was made to be paired with current generation technology... I also found other stats for the i7-980x and they have a score that is up to 7x better than my core2quad @3.5ghz... I also chose this RAM speed because the Rampage 3 can handle it, and it is twice the speed of my old ddr2 ram...
So what I am hoping for is enough performance to game on current generation games with atleast a 60fps while recording video... What I'm looking for here is hard-drive advice and any other advice i could get with achieving this...
as for the killerNIC... I noticed the difference when I had my CPU clocked at 2.5ghz (stock settings)... When I overclock my CPU to 3.5ghz, that speed can handle the networking work etc... I believe that was the only advantage if anything that the killerNIC offered, was offloading the networking from the CPU to the NIC itself... I could be wrong though... ZZZ that was an excellent post you made, I learned a great deal from it, thanks a ton bro... Makes me want to upgrade my router, although this linksys has treated me well imo... To me, Lag has never really been that big of an issue for me, aside from those random times that everyone in my house is downloding/uploading everything they can... that really sucks... So I mean, every once in a while you're gonna get lag no matter what you do... I just figured that the KillerNIC would reduce the frequency of times i'd get that super lag... it might of, but probably not...
If you guys think that going with the SATA pci-e card will give me a better chance of having a high performance system that will get me the performance I want then let me know...
Quote