SSD
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Hi /g/
For the first time in my career as a visual effects and motion graphics artist I will be working with RAW 4K and 5K footage.
I need to allocate a lot of fast storage to After Effects cache, so I'm going for 2TB SSD (2x 1TB in RAID 0)
My question is, is the cheapest option that I have - SanDisk Ultra II - significantly slower than other more expensive models? Since I'm buying two, it's a big deal to pay more for the drives.
Note that I will have them in RAID 0, so they are 2x faster than usual (am I right?).
One more thing. Is doing RAID 0 with my motherboard (X99s SLI) a bad idea? Should I invest in a RAID card too?
My current specs btw
>>55596005
trust me when i say your SSD's will be dead in a week if you use raid 0
>>55596017
Have already been using SSD's in RAID 0 for a year now:
See this:
>>55596007
>>55596044
>X99s
Your SATA 3 ports do 6GB/s theoretical and your current drive already probably saturates the link, it isn't going to be any faster than what you already have.
>>55596068
Can you please explain more? What is a solution here?
>>55596007
>1199MHz
>CL16
Why even clock your memory that high if the latency is going to be that terrible? It's worse than my 800MHz CL10.
>>55596091
You would need a NVMe SSD directly on the PCI bus to get the upgrade in speed you are looking for.
>>55596101
Because hes rendering shit not trying to play games.
>>55596118
>>55596068
Running a test to see if you are right. Standby. Results coming in 5 mins.
>>55596127
Yes
>>55596146
Its per port so you could get 12Gbps in raid0 or like ~1500MB/s (bit lower irl)
If you have an M.2 slot you could use that as well.
>>55596118
>>55596146
>>55596044
First result is here. This is the SSD RAID 0 I already have - 220GB
>>55596127
>Because hes rendering shit not trying to play games.
It doesn't fucking matter.
Memory latency affects everything.
>>55596179
m.2 SSD's are really expensive though.
>>55596207
Single SSD - Crucial - is coming next.
>>55596005
The Sandisk Ultra 2 has deep discounts semi frequently.
It was $168 a week ago.
sandisk ultra 2's are the best bang for your buck ssd you can get.
>>55596220
Most new SSD are only limited by SATA, even cheapo shit can saturate a port, thats why you need M.2 or a PCIe solution to go faster.
>>55596241
>>55596250
>>55596207
HOLY SHIT, the RAID 0 SSDs are actually working a lot better!
Testing the Samsung Evo 840 now (single SSD, not RAID)
>>55596207
You need NVMe
>>55596264
>NVMe
I don't have $2000 to spend on a 1TB drive.
>>55596276
They're 1K, and you can write them off as a business expense.
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16820228168
>>55596263
>>55596207
Ok clearly my RAID 0 SSD"s perform twice as fast as the single ones.
I will go for ULTRA II, 2 of them, to get 2TB of RAID 0 SSDs for cache :^)
>>55596312
Yeah but with $630 I can get 2x ULTRA II 1TB each.
>>55596208
It doesn't affect everything equally. Predicting which part of the movie file you're going to need is not that hard so your cpu can tell the ram controller to pull the next chunk out of ram more than 16 cycles before it needs it. As long as it is in cache before the cpu needs to put it in a register you're good.
