Tfw building a customer a PC that's better than yours

>tfw building a customer a PC that's better than yours
maximum sad.

3x m.2 nvme drives in R0, windows loads so fast you never see the boot screen

Other urls found in this thread:

serverfault.com/questions/9244/how-do-i-differentiate-fake-raid-from-real-raid
superuser.com/questions/245928/does-fake-raid-offer-any-advantage-over-software-raid
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Tfw I'm still rocking a shitty 2tb 7200rpm hdd
Upgrading to a 480gig pci ssd + 500gig sata ssd. Can't wait

I've had this.
But at least when you upgrade their pc you get free parts so you still win in some ways

Does that read and write speed even had an advantage?
I had raid 0 SSDs hit 1,100mbps but boot times were still slow.

well, I just put it all together today, but in my years with SSDs I have never seen a system so fast it literally boots before the windows logo can even pop up on the screen, pretty much goes directly from the mobo POST screen to desktop.

So, yeah I'd say it does have some returns to have those crazy fast speeds.

This was also a kind of test of nvme in general. Overall I'm very pleased and will recommend them to clients in the future if they have the budget ($300+ per drive on amazon they're not cheap)


Eh, this is a brand new build and replacing an old c2d system. I did get some parts that weren't used in the build, but that's just a corsair fan and a memory heatsink w/fans (again, corsair)

the difference will be amazing, grats

also a warning to anyone that does want to do this: boot/raid support for nvme drives/mobos seems to be spotty currently from what I've read on forums, double check your spec sheet that it says it can boot from the m.2 slot/whereever the drive is going, and that it supports nvme boot as well.


I used an ASrock z170 extreme7+ and samsung 950 pro m.2 drives for this and can confirm compatibility.

I've gotten my i7 2600, mx100, 2x 2tb WD black 12GB ram, and hd7970 for free from people upgrading.
Only parts I've purchased new are case and PSU.

So is it worth getting a cheap TLC SSD? Unless it is 850 EVO Pro or bust

>picture of screen

>3x m.2 nvme drives
enjoy your melting mobo

>he doesn't into no gui boot

>3x m.2 nvme drives in R0,
It isnt real RAID 0, it is fake RAID

>windows loads so fast you never see the boot screen
you're full of shit, I have 8x SATA enterprise SSDs in a RAID 0 behind a 28 port 12gig SAS RAID card and when this box booted windows id see the circle make 1.5 revolutions.

Fun fact between the BIOS checking the RAM and the RAID card spinning up my disks it takes >3 minutes before I even see a boot screen.

>it is fake RAID
what?

>fake raid
Bait.

>I dont know what real RAID is like
serverfault.com/questions/9244/how-do-i-differentiate-fake-raid-from-real-raid
superuser.com/questions/245928/does-fake-raid-offer-any-advantage-over-software-raid

pic related is real raid

I know what real RAID is, you apparently don't. Software RAID and hardware RAID are both real RAID, dumbass. One's just got a dedicated controller while the other doesn't.

More importantly, the dedicated controller is another point of failure and if it fucks up sometimes you can say goodbye to your data.

See

>the dedicated controller is another point of failure
spoken as someone who has zero experience with raid system. the chipset is the same point of failure

>More importantly, the dedicated controller is another point of failure and if it fucks up sometimes you can say goodbye to your data.
any
the array metadata is stored on all the disks

This isnt the 80s, any real RAID system does more than just stripe data. And if you want to get autistic RAID 0 isnt real raid as it isnt a redundant array. All OP has is a striped volume.

That would be so nice to have. I spend around 2 hours a project just on muxing and indexing. Just a SATA SSD as a scratch disk would be a big improvement.

How did you get into the PC building buisness? I've always wanted to do something like that for a living but have never known where to start

Here's a single NVMe drive in comparison.

Faster reads where it really matters, at the loss of some write speed that you need how often?

>3x m.2 nvme drives in R0
You've got a bottleneck somewhere

That's barely even 1.7x the speed of a single NVMe M.2 drive.

Here is my 250GB 950 Pro.

...

>3x m.2 nvme drives in R0
OP those speeds look a LOT more like you bought 3x samsung 840 EVO M.2 and then put them in RAID.

The 840 EVO is not an NVMe SSD, it's just a normal SATA SSD in M.2 form factor.

The NVMe M.2 drives are the SM951 and SM950 pro.

And the intel 750

There are a few others by now, I believe.

One could argue that either is sufficient, but the gap between the 256 and 512 GiB models is huge

>One could argue that either is sufficient, but the gap between the 256 and 512 GiB models is huge
>GiB
Fucked up my prefixes there. GB it is.

Actually on a bare drive i'd benchmark much closer to yours, my drive is my boot drive however and is never 100% idle for benchmarking so it can never benchmark at it's full potential.


as you said though, you'd be hard pressed to notice a difference between the two outside very specific workloads.

Mines's a boot drive too, so it could probably bench a lot better as well

>tfw hardware reflects your ego feels & self-worth

>Mines's a boot drive too
not when you did that benchmark it wasnt

A fully formatted SM950 Pro is 476.94GiB, your drive shows up as a single 477GiB empty partition, meaning it's empty and unused, and certainly not your boot partition.

How are you going to try and lie on Sup Forums about tech?

my BTFO detector is going bonkers

Bad RAID controllers and some really early experience with fake RAID left a sour taste for hardware based RAID.
Been a fan of ZFS and HBAs ever since.

BTFO

Wow yeah not sure why I'm not much faster. May I ask what drive you're using? I have 950 pros.

I'm running ATTO benchmark right now, I know crystaldiskmark has it's flaws.

That's a 500GB 950 pro.

>not sure why I'm not much faster
What motherboard are you running?

There aren't too many boards that fully support RAID 0 across that many M.2 drives, I assume you have at least 1 of them in a PCIe adapter, but that's just a guess.

Also you should make sure you're running the samsung NVMe driver not the generic driver from microsoft.

=/

Oh well, still feels incredibly fast, client will be happy which is what matters for me to get paid.

Also, is there an online webm conversion tool that'll strip sound for me? Wanted to make a video showing the boot for this guy
same drive x3, wonder what's going on.

ASrock z170 extreme7+

>ASrock z170 extreme7+
You fucking retard, Z170 doesn't have anywhere near enough PCIe lanes to run 3x PCIe x4 M.2 drives in RAID 0.

Good job wasting your clients money.

X99 and a 6850k or 5930k was the only thing that would have worked.

>webm conversion tool that'll strip sound for me?
Sup Forums strips sound from WEBm anyway.

eh, tried to upload one with sound and it told me to fuck off.

Huh, yeah didn't think of that, could literally be pcie bottleneck. good to know in the future.

I use anyvideo converter and it lets you strip sound

>could literally be pcie bottleneck
That is what it is, hell if you read the specs on newegg it even says two of the M.2 drives will run at SATA 3.0 speeds NOT PCIe x4, pic related

Aren't these really new really expensive SSDs basically useless as there isn't any increase in the actual user experience between them and a sata3 ssd?

Mine IS a boot drive. If I ran that benchmark before reformatting (which I did the day I got it), then I simply forgot about it.

>Huh, yeah didn't think of that, could literally be pcie bottleneck. good to know in the future.
How many GPUs are you running $10 says you dont have enough PCIe lanes to run your GPU(s) at full speed.

Kek, you really didn't think this build through OP


Still goes back to my original point then
>not when you did that benchmark it wasnt

tfw my m.2 drive (950 Pro) boots slower than a SATA drive because it takes a long time to initialize in BIOS/UEFI

Yup, that's a known "issue" with M.2 /PCIe SSDs.

Not really a major concern for most people though as they rarely turn their computers off, it's mainly useful in speeding up things once you're in the OS.

Yeah I very very rarely reboot so it's not huge for me but it sort of a letdown

It's also not 'slow' enough to be relevant. Total boot time is still significantly faster than an HDD, or even a crappy SSD. It adds maybe 5, at worst 10 seconds.

>How many GPUs
Just one. Was trying to get him to go SLI but he didn't want it (It's not a gaming machine), and thankful he didn't in light of these events.

So a extreme edition chip and mobo would be needed to take advantage of all three? What about 2?

for reference Intel quotes 20 pcie lanes for the z170

Z170 just isn't the platform for PCIe devices, especially multiple at high bandwidth you dont have the lanes available.

X99 with it's 40 PCIe 3.0 lanes is the only option.

You MIGHT be okay with the 5820k or 6800k which have 28 PCIe 3.0 lanes, but 20 PCIe 3.0 lanes is just too few.

The best bet is the 6850k which will give 40 PCIe lanes, x16 for the GPU, x4/x4/x4 (x12) for 3x M.2 drives, that's 28 PCIe lanes right there. Which still leaves some PCIe lanes for another GPU, or other PCIe devices later.

I appreciate the advice, thank you.