Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Categories

In this Discussion

› › RAID10 HDD vs SSD vs SSD Cached vs SAS
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

RAID10 HDD vs SSD vs SSD Cached vs SAS

darknessendsdarknessends Member
edited December 2012 in General

Hi guys,

Can u arrange RAID10 HDD, SSD, SSD Cached and SAS in following ways.
1. According to what VM you would want to quickly buy. ( For buyers )
2. According to what is most good in performance and quality wise ( For providers )

Thanks for those who are participating in.

Comments

  • JacobJacob Member

    Performance: SSD > SAS 10/15K > SSD Cached > SATA

  • rds100rds100 Member

    Define performance. Linear read / write speed, or random or what?

  • Nick_ANick_A Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    Why?

  • DamianDamian Member

    @darknessends said: 1. According to what VM you would want to quickly buy. ( For buyers )

    Cheapest, then more expensive.

    @darknessends said: 2. According to what is most good in performance and quality wise ( For providers )

    Performance != quality.

    Performance: SSD > SAS 10/15K > SSD Cached > SATA
    Quality: 15k SAS > 10k SAS > 7.2k enterprise SATA > 7.2k desktop SATA > SSD

  • darknessendsdarknessends Member

    @Damian said: Damian 11:28PM Flag

    Member
    @darknessends said: 1. According to what VM you would want to quickly buy. ( For buyers )

    Cheapest, then more expensive.

    @darknessends said: 2. According to what is most good in performance and quality wise ( For providers )

    Performance != quality.

    Performance: SSD > SAS 10/15K > SSD Cached > SATA

    Quality: 15k SAS > 10k SAS > 7.2k enterprise SATA > 7.2k desktop SATA > SSD

    So we can say 15k SAS is good combination of performance + quality.
    That is the best one.

  • DamianDamian Member

    @darknessends said: So we can say 15k SAS is good combination of performance + quality.

    That is the best one.

    I guess. I'm not really sure that the massive premium price over standard SATA with a good controller is worth it.

  • pubcrawlerpubcrawler Banned

    How is SSD lowest on "quality" @Damian :) ? Is that purely from the provider perspective based on cost per terabyte?

  • DamianDamian Member

    @pubcrawler said: How is SSD lowest on "quality" @Damian :) ? Is that purely from the provider perspective based on cost per terabyte?

    No, it's purely based that, so far, every SSD I've had has crapped out in less than a year or two. Perhaps i'm inherently unlucky?

  • bamnbamn Member

    @Damian said: No, it's purely based that, so far, every SSD I've had has crapped out in less than a year or two.

    Wasn't some SSD provider on here saying the replacement time was much faster on SSD than he anticipated?

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    I'm of the opinion that SSD cached SATA is the best bang for buck, while SATA drives with a good controller is just fine most of the time.

  • pubcrawlerpubcrawler Banned

    Tried the Samsung 830/840 @Damian?

  • DamianDamian Member

    @pubcrawler said: Tried the Samsung 830/840 @Damian?

    I have a couple of 830's in place now, but it's only been a few months. Hopefully they will win me over on SSD storage.

  • pubcrawlerpubcrawler Banned

    Lots of folks swear by the Samsungs. Have yet for any of our SSDs to go bad.

    Have Supertalent and Samsung only so far.

  • SimpleNodeSimpleNode Member

    @darknessends said: According to what VM you would want to quickly buy

    http://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/5819/kvm-disk-survey

Sign In or Register to comment.