Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Computers
Thread started 05 Nov 2017 (Sunday) 11:59
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Using M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD instead of hard drives.

 
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2010
Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
Nov 06, 2017 04:49 |  #16

Thanks guys, I now know what to put on that Christmas list :).

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,712 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been edited 14 days ago by CyberDyneSystems.
Nov 06, 2017 10:25 |  #17

Man I wish I could take advantage of SSD boot times,. alas, with an Adaptec RAID controller on board for the spinning disks, that card takes about 5 times as long to boot as the MB and OS combined... so the SSD advantage there is eliminated. :(

Thank god for a very functional chipset and sleep mode.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scoobert
Goldmember
1,010 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Feb 2013
Iowa
Nov 06, 2017 11:04 |  #18

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18489892 (external link)
Man I wish I could take advantage of SSD boot times,. alas, with an Adaptec RAID controller on board for the spinning disks, that card takes about 5 times as long to boot as the MB and OS combined... so the SSD advantage there is eliminated. :(

Thank god for a very functional chipset and sleep mode.

How many drives you running in raid Jake?

I have a dual drive raid 1 backup that runs USB 3.1 and my friend has the 4 bay raid 5 highpiont that runs on usb 3.1. Both ours are the gen 2 usb 3.1 which is up to 10 gigabits. Considering the spinning drives are running at 6 gigabits they run just as fast in an external drivebay as they do in the system. Granted you need to have a motherboard with usb 3.1 or an adapter card. I used to run everything with Esata for the speeds but this usb 3.1 is just as fast and requires no add on controllers :)




LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Goldmember
2,857 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Nov 06, 2017 12:31 |  #19

My dual Xeon workstation has a SATA/SAS onboard RAID controller. I could have up to 6 drives as RAID 1 or 0 (and using included SAS cables take up less space then SATA cables). It does take a while to go through the whole BIOS boot (the controller scans for any configuration updates anytime I boot). However, I did have an additional Samsung EVO SSD laying around. I decided to have it as my boot drive, and then my RAID drives as separate data drives. It does cut down overall boot times (even if there isn't a way to cut down the initial BIOS run).


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,712 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been last edited 14 days ago by CyberDyneSystems. 2 edits done in total.
Nov 06, 2017 14:05 |  #20

The Adaptec is currently controlling a 4 drive x 4TB with on demand spare in RAID 10 for my data photos etc. RAID 10 gives me double speed and redundancy at the same time. It's not the most economical RAID, but it's one of the best combos for redundancy and performance combined.

All Raid controllers, even on-board ones take up some boot time, but this Adaptec is STUPID slow! It takes ages. Never seen one so time consuming.
This array is 5 of 9 drives in my tower, and one of 3 RAID arrays.

The other two arrays are on the motherboard controller(intel)
- Pair of 3TB drives mirrored for "other" data (non photo related, documents etc. This is my D:/ drive.
- Pair of Samsung 850 SSD mirrored for OS/boot. C:/

I was going to use some of the additional capacity of the Adaptec for an external e-SATA enclosure, I have the fan out, but never bothered. When single platter capacities shot up, I found I could archive the entire multi terabyte array to a single external drive, no need for disk spanning, so the external RAID array became moot.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Goldmember
2,857 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Nov 06, 2017 19:57 |  #21

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18490124 (external link)
The Adaptec is currently controlling a 4 drive x 4TB with on demand spare in RAID 10 for my data photos etc. RAID 10 gives me double speed and redundancy at the same time. It's not the most economical RAID, but it's one of the best combos for redundancy and performance combined.

Not really. RAID 0 (and RAID 10) offers faster throughput and latency compared to one drive of similar specs. RAID configurations have never been shown to have twice the speed, but they have historically provided better performance or redundancy. Striped drives are strongest at read speeds, and may not have much benefit for write speeds.

Wikipedia RAID 10 (external link)

The Theoretical and Real Performance of RAID 10 (external link)


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,712 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been last edited 13 days ago by CyberDyneSystems. 2 edits done in total.
Nov 06, 2017 20:26 |  #22

Well yes, I do understand this. The closest I ever came to actually doubling speed was back when I was using 4GB "Micropolis" ultrawide SCSI drives.

Still, faster than most affordable RAID 5 solutions, and MUCH easier (faster_) to rebuild.

That said, not all raid arrays or RAID controllers are equal. My own tests on this system I am using were far more productive than his.Note, he did not quite grasp that RAID 10 is always RAID 1+0, and not RAID 0+1. that's simply called RAID 01.

The Wiki article sums up my experiences,

"According to manufacturer specifications and official independent benchmarks,[8][9][10] in most cases RAID 10 provides better throughput and latency than all other RAID levels except RAID 0 (which wins in throughput). Thus, it is the preferable RAID level for I/O-intensive applications such as database, email, and web servers, as well as for any other use requiring high disk performance.[11]"


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Goldmember
2,857 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Nov 06, 2017 20:33 as a reply to CyberDyneSystems's post |  #23

Ah, yes...the days of SCSI, and right before PCI, VESA Local Bus or EISA....the memories:-)


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,712 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been edited 4 days ago by CyberDyneSystems.
Nov 06, 2017 20:36 |  #24

Those SCSI busses were a LOT fatter than any drive/s could keep up with :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,712 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Nov 06, 2017 20:41 |  #25

I just found this;


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,712 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Nov 06, 2017 20:43 |  #26




They were so HUGE


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Goldmember
2,857 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Post has been last edited 13 days ago by davesrose. 4 edits done in total.
Nov 06, 2017 20:48 as a reply to CyberDyneSystems's post |  #27

Yeah, I remember how wide those SCSI drives would get. But also when I was growing up, my dad had a IBM PC with what was then an expensive 40MB hard drive (not just floppy drives). I remember when I was in college, I tried dusting it off and seeing if it ran. His earlier Atari 800 still ran, but the HD from the IBM didn't boot. Tried opening the case and was flabbergasted by just how big those early "personal" drives were (it was about the same size as your links...and back when 40MB was so expensive). The computer cases themselves were also made like tanks! It's kind of cool history to watch Computer Chronicles (you can find episodes on youtube). They had their own solid state technology of sorts in the early 80s called bubble memory. They couldn't keep up with HD prices and increased RAM speed.

edit:


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2010
Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
Nov 07, 2017 07:31 |  #28

davesrose wrote in post #18490412 (external link)
Yeah, I remember how wide those SCSI drives would get. But also when I was growing up, my dad had a IBM PC with what was then an expensive 40MB hard drive (not just floppy drives). I remember when I was in college, I tried dusting it off and seeing if it ran. His earlier Atari 800 still ran, but the HD from the IBM didn't boot. Tried opening the case and was flabbergasted by just how big those early "personal" drives were (it was about the same size as your links...and back when 40MB was so expensive). The computer cases themselves were also made like tanks! It's kind of cool history to watch Computer Chronicles (you can find episodes on youtube). They had their own solid state technology of sorts in the early 80s called bubble memory. They couldn't keep up with HD prices and increased RAM speed.

edit:

What a brilliant bit of video, thanks for posting it.


I am so glad we are not having to pay 86 prices for HDD capacity. If I did the math right that would make a 2TB HDD cost $83,886,080.00 (based on $40 MB) and thats not accounting for inflation! The last 2TB drive I bought would have been about $80 US including the VAT @20%. Not much has got a million times cheaper in the last forty years. It was in the mid 80's I got my first computer, a Sinclair ZX Spectrum + with 48KB RAM and 16KB ROM, the same as the Commodore 64.

I would hate to think about the cost of RAM too, I don't know what mid 80's RAM prices were like, I only really got involved with personal computing in the early to mid 90's, when RAM was stuck at pretty much £30 MB, which would mean my current machine would have had around half a million pounds worth of RAM in it.

My first PC system in 1995 had a 486 DX II 66 processor, 8MB RAM, a 540 MB HDD, an SVGA graphics card with 2MB VRAM, enough to run 800×600 in full 24 bit colour! It also had a 8× CD ROM, really top of the line for Easter 95. Since it was before August it came with MS DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.11 for Workgroups. No networking though, so I had to add a 28K fax modem once I got it so that I could access the university computers from home, via Compuserve. Compuserve made accessing the university computers via telnet easier than AOL did back then. In addition it had a 14" SVGA monitor, and it all came in at £1600!

That in today's pounds is pretty much what an i7 6700, 16 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD and 2TB HDD system with a 2GB VRAM GTX 960 GPU, DVD RW, multi card reader, 10/100/100 wired ethernet and wifi, and a 5K 5120×2880 monitor cost me last year. Two thousand times as much system memory, and a thousand times as much video memory. Then you have four times as many processor cores, running at 50× the clock speed. The new screen has 6.4× the number of pixels on the long dimension, and is 2.2 by 1.7 times larger. Oh and tiny 0.4800 MP compared to 14.7456 MP.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Goldmember
2,857 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Nov 07, 2017 10:35 as a reply to BigAl007's post |  #29

For some more comparisons of how far we've come: the first Commodore Pet that came out in 1977 had either 4K or 8K RAM options! I remember my dad spending a lot to upgrade RAM and HD for his IBM PC (with expansions, it could get up to 640K). At that point,48K of RAM cost over $2000 (external link). My dad didn't get a new computer until the popularity of CD-ROMs with soundcards came around. By that point, he paid around $3500 for a Gateway 2000 486 DX2 with EISA tower and SCSI HD (both high end options). At the time, Gateway was pretty popular as a mail order computer company, that sported cow spotted boxes. My first computer was a locally made 486DX-33 that I used throughout high school (think it had 8MB RAM and 160MB HD). My dad didn't want me using a modem because of potential phone bills. When I got to college, my folks got me a Gateway with Pentium 133 and our dorms had T1 connections. By the time I graduated grad school, broadband was becoming popular. So the only time I had to contend with slow load times of 28-56K modems was visiting family. In fact, one time I drove my grandma to her condo in Florida, and found I needed to send a large project file to my client in DC. There was no way I could send it using AOL and dial up. I was able to find a wifi spot at Starbucks.


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
13,705 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Sep 2007
Nov 07, 2017 10:47 |  #30

Scoobert wrote in post #18489395 (external link)
Have these in my system.

950 Pro Pcie NVME (512 gig)
960 Evo Pcie NVME (512 Gig)
850 Pro Sata (512 Gig)
AMD R7 (480 Gig) which uses the OCZ Barefoot 3 controller


i7-7700K @5.1 Ghz
16 gig Gskill TridentZ ddr4 3200
Asus 1070
all mounted on a Asus Strix Z270 mobo.

Ruining LR on either of the pcie drives shows no discernible difference at all. Even though the 950 will benchmark faster than the 960 EVO.
Running LR on the Sata based SSD's you can tell a difference between both how smooth the program runs and its export speed. Not huge, but enough to notice that the pcie drives perform better. Again though even though the 850 Pro kills the AMD SSD in benchmarks running LR on the two drives results in almost identical performance.

Spinning drives (2tb WD Blacks) lagged so far behind the sata drives and especially the pcie drives that I removed them from the system. Now the only spinning drives I have (4TB WD Reds) run in a external USB 3.1 raid array as picture back up drives. The new usb 3.1 is so fast that the external drives benchmark at almost the same speed they did when hooked straight to the motherboard and mounted internally.


Win10 on the 950 Pro boots SUPER fast and runs really smooth, and this coming from a guy who said he would NEVER leave win7 ultimate.

thumbnailHosted photo: posted by Scoobert in
./showthread.php?p=184​89395&i=i245325628
forum: Computers

fatal flaw of LR, runs like molasses. I'm betting on my slow system, using basic SSD's C1 would run circles around a powerhouse machine running LR.

on the win 10 note, that sucker really does boot fast. Not that big of an issue since I'm in sleep mode all the time, just cool to see after an update/power outage.


Sony A7rii x2 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 35/2.8 - CV 35/1.7 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

800 views & 12 likes for this thread
Using M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD instead of hard drives.
FORUMS General Gear Talk Computers


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00084 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
903 guests, 427 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016