Intel SSDs RAID 0, A Case Study In Speed, Take 2

We recently showed you how Intel was intent on upping the ante in Solid State Disk performance, with our evaluation and performance analysis on the release of their X25-M series SSDs.  Though offerings from other SSD manufacturers like OCZ and Samsung have come to market with better performance since then, there was no question Intel's SSD flat out smoked the competition in the cost-effective, consumer grade MLC (Multi-Level Cell) SSD market. With an average sustained throughput of ~225MB/sec for reads, around 74MB/sec observed write performance, and blistering fast sub-millisecond random access, we were left thoroughly impressed by Intel's first consumer-ready effort in SSD technology. However, at the time of launch, we only had access to one of these new SSDs from Intel and as such couldn't provide you with RAID performance metrics back then. 


Of course, that changed the other day when the local courier delivered another Intel kit to our door. As such, and with a bit of that "Friday on our minds" attitude adjustment going on in the lab, we decided to RAID a pair of these SSDs up to see what they could do.  Blinding speed in RAID 0 mode?  Yes, you could say that...

Test system specifications:  Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850, Asus Striker II Extreme (790i SLI Ultra chipset) motherboard, 2GB Corsair DDR3-1,333, GeForce 8800 GTX


Sandra HDD Read - Click for full view

Sandra HDD Write - Click for full view

IOMeter Results - 8K File Size, 80% Reads/20% Writes, 20% Random Access

Though there is a pronounced saw-toothed performance pattern here, you can see that a pair of these drives offers, you guessed it, up to double the IO throughput of a single drive.  For any standard SATA RAID 0 array we've tested to date, these are easily the fastest IOMeter numbers we've seen.  Interestingly, our Sandra tests show the drives offer 396MB/s for read performance and 130MB/s write performance, while HD Tune and HD Tach show peaks and valleys from 200MB/s to 300MB/s.  Regardless, we hope you enjoyed this quick-take performance test of what Intel's new SSDs can do in a performance-targeted RAID 0 setup.  As always, with RAID 0, be sure to back up your data since you're effectively doubling your available failure points.  Regardless, we're sure many of you have run RIAD 0 setups reliably for years now and there's no question a pair of Intel's X25M drives will make for a potent storage subsystem, especially as an OS volume.

Word is Intel's performance-tuned SLC drives are waiting in the wings too. So stay tuned here for our analysis as we get our hands on one of those beasts.

Via:  HotHardware
Tags:  Intel, SSD, RAID, SD, SSDs, case, Study, Speed, DS, Take 2, AI, id, K
Super Dave 6 years ago

Wow! Are you using the motherboard's onboard RAID controller?

AlaskaDrew 6 years ago

Well from what the system spec says it looks like this was only using the onboard raid. Awsome! I was wondering that exact thing. I asked EVGA tech support if this SSD would work in RAID 0 on thier 790i Ultra SLI board and they said it would work fine as long as the throughput doesn't go over the SATA2 spec. Nice to see that it not only works but it works FAST! Here is another good review of these drives in RAID:,2845,2329595,00.asp

bob_on_the_cob 6 years ago


[quote user="News"]

Though there is a pronounced saw-toothed performance pattern


I'll take even the lowest point of that saw tooth. These things are crazy fast!


[quote user="Super Dave"]

Wow! Are you using the motherboard's onboard RAID controller?



Looks like it. I see Nvidia stripe as the HD name.

warlord 6 years ago

Can't wait to have that kinda performance in my box. It's about time we see the bottleneck that was hard drives finally catch up

Dave_HH 6 years ago

Yep, simple on-board NVIDIA SATA off the Southbridge in RAID 0. Not sure exactly what's up with the saw-tooth pattern actually. Have to play with things a bit more...

kris2lee 6 years ago

Very nice! I just got two Super Talent OX 32 GB drives. Haven't been able to test them in RAID 0 configuration because I can not boot into Vista (64) when I configure RAID from BIOS, even when my system is on separate hard drive.

Anyway, this saw-toothed performance seams to be something unique to SSD's. Tooth in my graph are different still - there is more of them, about 30.

Minimum transfer rate of single drive by HD Tune was 108.1 MB/sec, maximum is 146 MB/sec, average was 132.1 MB/sec.

Access time was 0.2 ms and burst rate was 148.6 MB/sec.

I also did write speed test by coping large file from one SSD to another one and average was around 75-80 MB/sec in Vista. This is my estimate, it started on quiet high level like 100 MB/sec and went down from there to 70 MB/sec for 10 GB file. Not really accurate but will give some idea.

In Europe you can get one for about 100 euro that will make about 3,125 euro for gigabyte. Intel X18-M 80 GB will cost about twice per gigabyte.

Super Dave 6 years ago

[quote user="kris2lee"]

Anyway, this saw-toothed performance seams to be something unique to SSD's. Tooth in my graph are different still - there is more of them, about 30.


That saw-tooth pattern presented itself when I built an experimental RAID array using a couple of old WD 80Gig IDE hard drives with a Silicon Image RAID card, so I don't believe it is unique to SSD's (perhaps to RAID)! Take a look:


Dave_HH 6 years ago

I think the big peaks and valleys are a result of high erase/re-write latency of MLC flash. You don't see that with SLC actually. And welcome to HH kris2lee. Yes

ice_73 6 years ago

just thought id mention to you guys you made engadget.

zewtastic 6 years ago

Here are the results from Velociraptor Raid 0.

shadowmaster625 6 years ago

Looks fast! And it also unfortunately looks like a great way for intel to sell SSD controllers. What we really need is for Intel and/or AMD to start thinking intelligently about SSDs.

AMD and Intel need to agree on a standard for an integrated SSD controller. And then create a new open standard for a Flash SSD DIMM socket.

Then I could buy a 32 or 64 GB SSD DIMM and plug it into a socket next to my RAM, and have a SUPER-FAST hard drive. Imagine a SSD DIMM that costs $50 and puts out even better numbers than the Fusion-IO! With economy of scale, it would only cost a few dollers per CPU and a few dollars more for the motherboard. But the performance would shatter the current paradigm.

The cost of the DIMMs would be low because there would be no expensive controller on the module, like there is now with flash SSDs. And that is how it should be! There is NO need for a controller on a memory module! How we ended up taking this convoluted route baffles me. It is a fatally flawed design that is always going to be bottlenecked by the SATA interface, no matter how fast it is. The SSD MUST have a direct link to the CPU in order to unleash its true performance potential.

This would increase performance so much that if VIA did this with their Nano CPU, they would have an end product that outperforms even Nehalem in real-world everyday PC usage. If you dont believe me, you need to check out the Fusion-IO. With SSD controller integration, you can have Fusion-IO level performance for dirt cheap.

If you understand what I am talking about here, and can see that this is truly the way to go with SSDs, then you need to help get the word to AMD and Intel. Whoever does it first is going to make a killing. I'd prefer it to be AMD at this point but it just needs to get done.

bob_on_the_cob 6 years ago

Yeah it will be intresting to see if the keep the same hard drive format. Its kind a waste of space.

Dave_HH 6 years ago


Interesting commentary here on future architectures for SSDs. So remove the SATA interface all together, integrate the Flash memory controller on the motherboard or CPU and just let 'er rip from there? There's a whole lot of protocol, error checking etc that would get left behind without SATA. What about RAID arrays? Something needs to understand RAID commands too. You see where I'm going.

This is an interesting concept regardless, if only feasible for simple, single drive desktop or workstation applications.

And welcome to HH!

bossman068410 6 years ago

This might be a moronic question...

I count 10 chips on the Drive.

Why can't they raid those chips internally?

Increase the speed maybe 8 times the current speed?

I always wondered why it took them so long to put multiple processors on one cpu.......

Dave_HH 5 years ago

Boss, that's being done by some SSD manufacturers right now actually. :)

bob_on_the_cob 5 years ago

So I was doing some reading and read that the saw tooth performance is because of the controller on most SSDs and that someone had a controller that fixed that issue. can't remember now were I read that? Something to look into at least. IDK.

Super Dave 5 years ago

So in my situation with a RAID-0 array with platter hard drives (no SSD), would it be the Silicon Image controller that induces the saw-tooth patern?

Der Meister 5 years ago

I wonder what the life on the SSD's will be? I red a review on how they think to test it but they dont know for sure yet. Anyways I am going to get one for my OS on my next PC

bchiu 5 years ago

I guess it does help a little with RAID0 eh..

However you can see my graph is not a jig-saw, even tho we are using exact same on-board Nvidia RAID and two Intel X25-M 80G. Not sure why..??

Post a Comment
or Register to comment