... and You should be familiar with reading comprehension

Never mind...this guys' a troll.

They're getting more and more clever these days, at least insofar as troll cleverness goes (virtual courage, virtual knowledge, etc....none of it actually being real).

And lately I've been catching myself getting fooled as to the authenticity of their posts (the evolving trolls) hence engaging with them far more often than I'd prefer.

(talk about a complete waste of time)

Ignore List: Kyle_PL - Check!

--

To everyone else, RAID is perfectly possible w OWC SSDs (esp the RE or Pro Models- that's what they're actually specifically built for).

So it's not only possible....it's amazing.


Scott

http://www.dropbox.com/s/jchoe8olcof...%2019%20PM.jpg

Which OCZ SSD line was it??

Do you know any SATA SSD model, which RAID is not possible? (of course at least two SSD are needed to build RAID out of the typical SSD .... like Samsung 830). Or You just trolling?

Lol!!

Forgot to hit ignore!!

--

By the way...you should go into politics.

You have a real talent at completely not addressing the subject at hand (the subject we were talking about was fair comparisons...at least most recently, 3G vs 3G, 6G vs 6G, drive degradation, over-provisioning, etc...) and then moving onto some thing else that might work for ya.

No time to explain all this, anyways.

Please use the search function. Or google for that matter!! This forum is loaded w info!!

And in all honesty man, I think you're completely uneducated on the genuine quality (in literally EVERY aspect) of OWC SSDs (and everything else they make, for that matter).

I really do reccomend you check them out: OWC [ macsales - dot - com ]

Good luck!

Scott

OK

You said:
Let's see if You are a liar or not:

Charts, benchmarks SSD Charts 2011, AS-SSD Sequential Write

OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 6G 240 GB - 240 MB/s write speed of incompressible data

For comparison:
Samsung SSD 830 256 GB - 392 MB/s write speed of incompressible data
Vertex 4 256 GB - 461 MB/s write speed of incompressible data

OCZ Vertex 4 256GB - AS-SSD | bit-tech.net

so ... I think You should ... what You said? ...:

A 192 track session recorded @ 96K - with 32 bit sound files needs 73.6 MB/sec of transfer rate. So any of those drives are more than capable. 250 MB/sec or 500 MB/Sec in the audio world 99% of most applications most any SSD is overkill. Plus if you are using a DAW that caches audio to RAM read speeds your drive are a moot point.

Why would you need 960GB?

Just grab a fast 250 or 320 and then move the projects to a normal HDD when finished or at the moment unused.

+1 - True that.

While I still use a 3G OWC SSD RE as my 'working' or 'session' drive, it's become totally overkill (RAM cache wasn't available in PT when I got the SSD). Plus, I've got 64GB of ROCKIN' RAM from OWC so I'm able to allocate 32GB, easily. The rest is for the usual stuff plus my VEP templates.

--

What I'm more interested in is SSDs for the OS and of course for large sample libraries. Right now my libraries are split b/w 3G OWC RE SSDs and a few eSATA 2.0 Dual-Hardware RAID 0 Enclosures each with 2 x 500GB WD RE4s.

I'm not so concerned w the big advertised, large-file, 25-cycle, sustained benchmarks. Those numbers are really only applicable when transferring a large file(s) from one destination to the next. Which is relatively common, but not the biggest issue to be concerned with and definitely not what DAW users spend the vast majorly of their time doing.

I'd much rather see the read speed of random, small files (4KB+) as this is by far the most important aspect (regarding speed / performance) for nearly every user....especially DAW users.

Cheers,

Scott

....duplicate post....

For me - MBPro quad, Optibay SSD for sample libraries like LASS, Cinematic Strings, Heavyocity, fast loads really help. I have 4GB left on the 480GB SSD in there at the moment, so 960GB could be on the cards, I'm constantly juggling which libraries I take mobile.

I love the fact that I can take sessions into a post suite with the Director and make creative changes to cues/tracks with orchestral templates (and the rest) while they are editing, fast mobile workflow, thank-you OWC!

Kyle was correct, NO SSD likes RAID since TRIM cannot access SSD's in a RAID array. An upcoming version of Intel RST (Windows only AFAIK) is supposed to support TRIM in RAID0 arrays.

Furthermore, SSD speed (MB/s) does affect loading times for sample libraries, due to the low access times - lower bandwidth becomes a limiting factor here. However, it makes more sense to have a few smaller SSDs to load libraries, both considering budget and load time. Even better then RAID0.

Haha that's total bull!!

I personally get faster speeds than that for OWC's 3G (~273MB/s)!!!!! Hahaha

Would you like a screen shot??

And as for the 6G OWC SSDs...i actually HAVE AND USE two of them!!!! What a concept!!!!!

The sustained reads for large files (ie the BIG, least-often used stat you keep referring to) for the OWC 6G is well over 500MB/s (something like 543MB/s).
Whatever it says on their site...that's what it will be in real-life use. That's part of what I think makes this company so bad ass!!!

Wow, man.


Scott

...

???

No SSD likes RAID?? (please re-read Kyle's post and their universal RAID capabilities).

So why then has OWC (and others I believe) been offering their RE and other Pro RAID-ready models since day one??

In my experiments, Raid-Ready SSDs LOVE RAID 0!!!

Also, FYI Kyle said, "which SSDs do not do RAID??" In other words applying it's fine for ALL SSDs; not the other way around.

Scott

P.S. This whole thread I've been referring to hardware-RAID only (+SSDs). I don't use software RAID for all the typical reasons ( OS / Hardware compatibility, DAW-compatability, reliability / stability issues, etc, etc, etc).

"likes"? TRIM does not work in RAID (0 for example)

"likes" was the word I was quoting. Please read above posts.

Scott

Use whatever word you want. NO ssd supports TRIM when used in a RAID array. It does not mean you can't use an SSD in RAID. It means that at some point, the SSD's in a RAID array will drop performance tremendously. We have tested this enough to know.
PS: you can't update SSD firmware either when put in a RAID array, they are simply not recognized.

That's interesting, as far as I can tell from OWC's site they claim their SSD's do not drop in performance over time. Or do you mean only when the SSD's are used in RAID 0?

"Example: An OWC Pro SSD that's 240GB in size with 7% over-provisioning is actually a 256GB drive with 7% allocated for data management, and to maintain the drive's high-performance level.

Unlike most SSDs on the market today, the Mercury Pro family uses advanced DuraWrite™ wear-leveling and block management technologies to keep Read/Write performance at peak while others see performance fall."

I mean in a RAID array.

Chill man.

That's great about TRIM and SSDs and RAID. That's not what I was talking about.

When you jumped in...you you went on about TRIM and whether or not it's applicable to SSDs.

Take a look at what was being discussed from when I joined the thread (ie my first post #27)....and then when you jumped in.

--

That said, OWC's RAID-specific SSDs (ie similar category of drives as the WD RE4 models) DO NOT drop in performance over at least 5 yrs. After that who knows....but if it's gone on that strong for that long...I personally wouldn't be too worried about it!!

Plus, it'll have been 5 years!!

Probably some new SSD tech out there by then...anyways....not the point...the point is OWC's RAID-specific SSDs WILL NOT degrade (ie drop in performance / speed) like many, many of the other SSD brands out there for at least 5 years when used in a RAID Array (Hardware RAID 0, for example).

Also, it would be REDUNDANT to have OWC SSDs capable of system profiler-based TRIM.....OWC SSDs HAVE TRIM BUILT INTO THE DRIVES THEMSELVES!!

In fact, both OWC themselves and users of their drives have stated that the proprietary TRIM firmware BUILT INTO their SSDs is significantly better than if you were to enable TRIM in the system profiler.

So again, for OWC SSDs, enabling TRIM is NOT needed and is most likely not recommended.

Their built-in proprietary TRIM has shown to do the job even better.

[ And FYI- I remember when they developed this firmware. They did so because Intel was taking forever. Excellent company. ]

--

Also, who ever said [ 'firmware upgrades CAN be done to SSDs in a Raid Array w/out wiping them clean' ] ??? No one!!! So what r u taking about?!?

Honestly man, you're making it out to seem as if I've said all this stuff about TRIM and SSDs that's false.

False info on the forum bugs me so if I have posted as such.....I'd like to be corrected.

So if you don't mind, post one or two sentences of mine from this thread that is false and we'll discuss.


Thx.

Scott

There is no such thing as "TRIM built into the SSD". SSD could only support TRIM (support TRIM command from system). There is no such thing as "internal TRIM".

Here ya go....

http://blog.macsales.com/tag/trim


Scott

And by the way, Kyle and Daw Plus:

You guys do realize you've ignored everything being discussed in the thread and have for whatever reason, decided to focus on one issue: TRIM!!

Take a look at what Kyle quoted out of my above post. Or any of them really.

Feel free to discuss the totality of the content within the posts of this thread.


Scott

Yes, you are correct.

OWC does not lie or exaggerate anything on their site (specs, performance, etc).

I know from years and years of experience as an OWC customer. And I own a wide variety of OWC products.

There is absolutely NO motivation for me to make any of this up or exaggerate anything at all.

They are among a small handful of my absolute favorite companies. From everything to the quality of their products to customer support to return policy, tech support, etc, etc, etc.

Simply the best in the biz for what they do, IMO (and that's a lot: SSDs, enclosures, HDD docks, etc).

For anyone reading this and not familiar with OWC, their website is:

http://www.macsales.com


Thx.

Scott

Hi Scott, actually I am chilled... I didn't think I would "sound" stressed in here"?

I chimed in in this thread where you and Kyle argued over TRIM and RAID. Since I didn't agree with your statement I made my comments.

I have to admit I am unsure about OWC's built-in TRIM replacement. The link you posted has a lot of user comments being as suspicious as mine-even a quote from the Sandforce staff commenting TRIM is still required.

Regarding RAID. Kyle brought it up, you replied. I replied... :-)
I never stated RAID does not work with SSDs. It works very well, we get sustained read speeds of over 900MB/s with 2 disks, even in RAID1. Until the drives are full, maybe a few overwrites are necessary. Then you know TRIM cannot do its job, and a performance collapse occurs. This happens with all SSDs I have tested with, and apart from OWCs own claims, I don't think anyone has tested multiple full overwrites in RAID to convince me it does not happen with their drives. I will certainly contact them, since this made me really curious.

Now, lets get back to the real topic while noone got hurt...yet. :-)

Cool.

If you do get in touch and make the arrangements, I would love to see the results of your testings.

Cheers.

Scott

I bought two and got them about week ago.
I carbon copy cloned from my old Apple 500GB SSD
125MB per second transfer between the drives
7.5GB per minute that was one fast system drive clone.

Having spent £loads on the Accelsior I'm v.interested in any accurate info that comes your way from OWC.
At the moment the Accelsior card in my MacPro runs well. I've also RAID 0 two 480gb OWC ssd's as a copy of my sample library HD (so primarily read only) in 2 sleds of the MP, so it will be interesting to see how the setup works over time.
Fast at the mo'