Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › SSD › Noticeable Difference Between Samsung 840 Pro 512gb and 840 500gb?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Noticeable Difference Between Samsung 840 Pro 512gb and 840 500gb? - Page 2

post #11 of 39
Thread Starter 
Thanks for everyone's advice! I took it once again and went for the Plextor M5 Pro Extreme 512gb for $399. It just arrived from newegg (and took forever to get here). I'm so excited to try it on. My only question now is, whether I should raid my two Sandisk Extremes 120gb drives and put them on the SATA III marvel controller, or whether I should put them on the intel SATA II controller? I only have 2 SATA III (marvel) connections available and two SATA II (intel) connections open. It appears as if Asus recommends the marvel SATA III controller for SSD caching, so that sounds to me like a marketing term for "this controller sucks". Would I still get better performance out of the Marvel SATA III controller over the Intel SATA II?

Thanks again!
post #12 of 39
If you RAID the 120GB drives you will definitely get better performance on the intel SATA 2 ports.
post #13 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Webster View Post

If you RAID the 120GB drives you will definitely get better performance on the intel SATA 2 ports.

Personal experience, I have 2 SSDs in RAID0 on the Marvell ports and got LOWER speeds than a single SSD. Not sure why, but with 128k stripes, and with less data than one drive capacity, it seemed NOT to balance over the two drives but filled them up sequentially, which would mean never getting the benefit of 2 read threads on separate SATA ports (unless two files being read simultaneously happened to be on alternate drives), AND always having the RAID overhead anyway.

Funny thing, while testing, I broke the raid..... and the first drive had all my data and was readable as a single drive.. I did not get any errors and I did see a single large drive while in RAID, so it is working... but I suspect there is something odd about the Marvell RAID controller.

YMMV, of course.

-jak
post #14 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakjak View Post

Personal experience, I have 2 SSDs in RAID0 on the Marvell ports and got LOWER speeds than a single SSD. Not sure why, but with 128k stripes, and with less data than one drive capacity, it seemed NOT to balance over the two drives but filled them up sequentially, which would mean never getting the benefit of 2 read threads on separate SATA ports (unless two files being read simultaneously happened to be on alternate drives), AND always having the RAID overhead anyway.

Funny thing, while testing, I broke the raid..... and the first drive had all my data and was readable as a single drive.. I did not get any errors and I did see a single large drive while in RAID, so it is working... but I suspect there is something odd about the Marvell RAID controller.

YMMV, of course.

-jak

If your Marvell SATA chip is the 9128, the lower performance in RAID 0 is easy to explain. The 9128 is connected to one PCIe lane (hopefully PCIe 2.0), but that is not one lane per SATA port, that is one PCIe lane shared by two SATA ports! Yet another reason why most of the Marvell SATA chips are crapola!

The thing about the one drive having all the data just fine, that makes no sense.
post #15 of 39
On my X58,Marvell chip even share that one line with NEC USB 3.0 chip.So if you got some ext.usb hdd in that port,you even got lower performance.
Marvell 9128 chip was never made to control SSD Raid,it was only made to handle HDD Raid.I was angry on Gigabyte why did they sell me board with sata2,5 ,but now i suspect they were caught with this SSD fever which has start right after they released X58 line.After SSD fever started,Asus tried to give us,X58 users who want to have better sata3 solution with released X58 Black Edition board.Black Edition have Marvell 9182 controller which uses two pci-e line but that too was poor solution and it was too late,Intel 6-series chip was here.I tested ASmedia 1061 that use too only one line,and it can better utilize pci-e line then Marvell,so we can say its not only motherboard manufactures fault we didnt have full sata3,Marvell is guilty a little bit too.
Edited by Unit Igor - 3/28/13 at 12:46am
post #16 of 39
Thread Starter 
Unfortunately, my two extra SATA III ports are Marvel 9128. So both of these ports are connected through one PCIe lane? Could it be possible that this one lane is PCIe 3? Could it also be possible that Asus wired it to take advantage of two lanes or is there some reason why this controller could never use two full lanes?Would it be wise of me to use this Marvell controller and its 2 SATA III ports for my mechanical and optical drive? Would I lose any performance then? Also, would I lose performance hooking up a non-raided Samdisk Extreme 120gb SSD to only one of the Marvell ports (leaving the other one open). Would I get at least near SATA III performance?

What would you guys/gals do if you had these to hook up on an Asus p8z77-v Deluxe (2x Intel SATA III, 4x Intel SATA II, 2x Marvell 9128 SATA III):

Plextor M5 Pro Extreme 512gb
Samsung 830 128gb
2x Sandisk Extreme 120gb
OCZ Agility 3 120gb
Seagate HDD 1tb (mechanical, SATA II)
BDR Optical

Can anyone tell me the most optimal configuration for connecting these drives to the available SATA connections? Thanks
post #17 of 39
- hang your 512 off an Intel sata 3 for OS and programs and games
- terabyte on sata2 port for backups, movies, etc
- optical on another sata 2 ( you'll never saturate it)
- sell the itty Bitty SSDs while they still have some value
post #18 of 39
Thread Starter 
That would in fact be ideal. However, all of the space on the SSDs is accounted for (except for the OCZ agility 3) with just a version of Debian on it for modeling purposes and is connected to JBoD for space. So i I think for now, I'm stuck with the smaller SSD and have to work them in somehow. The purpose of the larger 512 drive was not so much for consolidation of the other drives, but rather expansion for the main drive (which was one of the Sandisks). Of course, the options that I see at the moment, would be to upgrade the other sandisk and the samsung 830 (at least to to 240-256), or just try to work them in as they are -somehow. If I can adequately work them in, then I'd rather not spend the extra money.
post #19 of 39
In which case, use then, but leave one Marvell free.
However, if you are low on space on any SSD, upgrade it. Low free space will slow down and kill them early and you don't want to turn on the machine and see a drive missing, with no warning (even worse if you haven't backed up the night before).:
post #20 of 39
Line that Marvell controller use have 500mb/s bandwidth,but speed you will see will be 400mb/s,why,i dont know why.Intel sata3 have bandwidth of 600mb/s,but we see less then 550mb/s.
I have too P8Z77 v-deluxe.All my ports are occupy.I dont use Marvell controller because it prolongs my boot time.Instead of it i use AS Media esata port for my optical drive.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Shielded-eSATA-to-SATA-Cable-Serial-ATA-Type-I-L-7Pin-/330875121015?pt=US_Drive_Cables_dapters&hash=item4d09b1ad77
you can even connect on other esata port one more HDD,those two cant choke AS Media 1062 controller.
I would put 2 sandisk in raid on sata2 ports.
512gb and samsung 830 on sata3.
Agility and your 1tb hdd on other sata2
Edited by Unit Igor - 3/29/13 at 8:29am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: SSD
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › SSD › Noticeable Difference Between Samsung 840 Pro 512gb and 840 500gb?