[jetbot33]

Ok before I get flamed, I admit I am not that good with the technical stuff regarding motherboards, cpu's and sata iii ports.

Anyways, I am planning on buying two SATA III SSD's so I can run them RAID 0 on my new computer build which consists of a Asus Crosshair V Formula Motherboard and an AMD Phenom II 1090t x6.

The problem I run into is that apparently putting two SATA III SSD's in RAID 0 might max out their speeds only at SATA II levels instead of SATA III ones depending on the motherboard and CPU used. So my question is, will the motherboard and CPU I am planning to buy be able to support SATA III SSD'S in RAID 0? I am sorry if this was not worded very well or I did not give enough information so let me know if there is anything I can do to help the helpful community here help me!

Thanks

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by jetbot33

The problem I run into is that apparently putting two SATA III SSD's in RAID 0 might max out their speeds only at SATA II levels instead of SATA III ones depending on the motherboard and CPU used.

I've never heard that before...

Either way, it should work fine on a Crosshair V.

[RGone]

1. Don't know what size or brand of series 3 SSD you plan to get. Big ones will be hefty chunk of change.

2. Most AMD Sata 6 controllers have not had the issues seen on some Intel motherboards with mostly the later chipset.

3. But just saw a user posting in the "Storage" forum section and he was having problems with an AMD board and an SSD.

4. You will be sick if you buy two hefty priced series 3 SSD's and have issues.

5. To me it is pretty early in the maturity cycle of series 3 SSDs. YMMV.

[Archer0915]

Originally Posted by jetbot33

Ok before I get flamed, I admit I am not that good with the technical stuff regarding motherboards, cpu's and sata iii ports.

Anyways, I am planning on buying two SATA III SSD's so I can run them RAID 0 on my new computer build which consists of a Asus Crosshair V Formula Motherboard and an AMD Phenom II 1090t x6.

The problem I run into is that apparently putting two SATA III SSD's in RAID 0 might max out their speeds only at SATA II levels instead of SATA III ones depending on the motherboard and CPU used. So my question is, will the motherboard and CPU I am planning to buy be able to support SATA III SSD'S in RAID 0? I am sorry if this was not worded very well or I did not give enough information so let me know if there is anything I can do to help the helpful community here help me!

Thanks

I am thinking it is a bus issue not a SSD issue as far as the speed linit is concerned. I have not resd up on it but depending on PCIe lane assignments you very well could be limited.

there are 8 SATA III ports on that board which equates to 48Gbps or just under 6GBps so doing the math you would need 12 lanes (theoretical) to handle the data if everything was maxed.

My math could be wrong though

EDIT: If this block diagram is accurate then you only have 4GBps bandwidth between the 990NB and the 950SB which controlles a lot more than just the drives: http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/L/294...fx%20block.jpg If you actually use everythin a little it can choke you a lot.

[Sol_Invictus]

I was thinking of doing the same thing with a CHIV and have a 6990 already using bandwidth. So do I just stick to SATA II.

Has the bandwidth been upped on the 990's? Sorry to drop in on the the op's post

EDIT: I was just thinking, is there even any point? I game, most of em are limited to 60fps which it hits and stays there.

All the games I play run fine without stutter all maxed out inc fear 3, crysis 2 etc so is there even any big advantage? The OS will boot faster I know

but I only sleep it mostly so it fires up almost straight away??

[Archer0915]

Originally Posted by Sol_Invictus

I was thinking of doing the same thing with a CHIV and have a 6990 already using bandwidth. So do I just stick to SATA II.

Has the bandwidth been upped on the 990's? Sorry to drop in on the the op's post

EDIT: I was just thinking, is there even any point? I game, most of em are limited to 60fps which it hits and stays there.

All the games I play run fine without stutter all maxed out inc fear 3, crysis 2 etc so is there even any big advantage? The OS will boot faster I know

but I only sleep it mostly so it fires up almost straight away??

Short answer is no. The bandwidth from the SB to NB and CPU are your limiting factors. I use SATA III with absolutely no problems.

[jetbot33]

Originally Posted by RGone

1. Don't know what size or brand of series 3 SSD you plan to get. Big ones will be hefty chunk of change.

http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-sol...i-2-5-ssd.html

This is the SSD I want. Thanks everyone for for the help!

So basically with all the parts that I want to configure my SSD's in RAID 0, the ssd will max out up to SATA III speeds? My friend tried doing this with his intel system and found his ssd's could only max out at SATA II despite being SATA III ssd's. Just for clarification, thanks again, everyone!

[Woomack]

Transfers will be limited to SATA2/port only if you have problems with bios version or if you manually change SATA options in bios.
AMD controller is able to run 6x SATA3 drives on 990FX boards and full SATA3 speed for each port. It's making about 550MB/s on both SandForce and some Marvell based SSD ( Crucial M4 with new firmware ) and up to 750-850MB/s in RAID0 / 2 SSD ( depends what drive, cache settings etc ).

[RodPed]

The bigger problem is to get the Crosshair Formula V to recognize the SSDs. It will not accurately identify either an OCZ or Mushkin SSD. It truncates the identification in the GUI BIOS which screws up the entire process. If you want a SATA 6 SSD, buy another motherboard.

[oldbrave]

RodPed > where did you come up with that ?
If you'll check my sig, you will see that I'm running a Crosshair 5 Formula MB and a OCZ Vertex 3 SSD. Nothing in the bios is truncated and my ATTO numbers are 545 Mb/s read and 495 Mb/s write.
I think you need to check your sources !

[RodPed]

oldbrave, I came up with that by reading the screen, where it dropped two characters off the end of the device id for the Mushkin drive. In speaking with OCZ and Mushkin techs it became clear that I was not the only one having the problem. I checked my sources well before posting the comment. You appear to be using the 1301 BIOS. I threw the Crosshair into the garbage at BIOS 1003, which displayed the most erratic behaviour of the versions up to that date. You also appear to be using an FX 8150. I was using a 1090T, as were two others I corresponded with who had problems with the ASUS MB. Just because it works for you does not mean it will work for others. In that respect, the board is a piece of junk that nobody should buy unless they get real evidence that their particular configuration, in detail, actually works somewhere for someone.

[oldbrave]

Bye the same token, just because it didn't work for you doesn't mean that it will not work for others. To me, throwing a $200 MB in the trash and calling it a piece of junk that no one should buy unless they can get a guarantee that their particular configuration will work
is a sign of inexperience.

30

[RodPed]

oldbrave: Spelling. It's 'By the same token', not 'Bye the same token'. And, by the way, I programmed my first computer in 1976 and have built my computers from components for as long as that's been possible. Your 'oldbrave' handle doesn't impress anyone. You're an amateur. And junk is junk. The motherboard did not function properly, to the point where there was no fixing the problem. Moreover, what I told you was that you should not assume that because something works for you that it's going to work for everyone. Don't hand back the same information as if you knew what you were talking about. The board did not work in my configuration nor for others with the same, ordinary configuration. There was nothing unusual about it. Now get a life.

[EarthDog]

I agree with both of u. Rod, it didn't work at the time. Oldbrave it worked for you upon bios releases and subsequently works for most now.

Sensationalism doesn't help drive home any points to me

Now let's stay away from personal digs ...ob's points are as valid as yours.

[RodPed]

Earthdog: Always good to have mediation; however, the guy should have started out politely, instead of casting aspersions in his original post as if he knew all about the problem and assuming no one else did. It was arrogant and uninformed. And I won't put up with it. Neither should you. The only point he made was the same one I made to him. He didn't have a point.

[Zerix01]

Although this is an old thread I would just like to help confirm a few things here.

On my current 990FX 950SB based board and on my prior 890FX 850SB board I have been running two SATA 3 m4 SSD's in RAID 0 along with all other SATA ports populated. Granted I rarely pin all RAID 5 and RAID 0 drives at once but my SSD's will reach their full read speeds resulting in 1.1GB (gigabytes) per second tops and around 850MB/s average. This was the same on both boards. Two SSD's in RAID 0 on current AMD chipsets do not appear to have bandwidth issues.

[EarthDog]

Originally Posted by RodPed

Earthdog: Always good to have mediation; however, the guy should have started out politely, instead of casting aspersions in his original post as if he knew all about the problem and assuming no one else did. It was arrogant and uninformed. And I won't put up with it. Neither should you. The only point he made was the same one I made to him. He didn't have a point.

Rod, he is not a mind reader. Think about it. As far as HE knew, it worked. He obviously got his board post bios update. So since he knew nothing of your issue, its only logical to ask for sources since its working fine on his end. So again, you are both essentially right. Didnt work for you, but does for everyone now. Sure the 'inexperienced' comment was a bit off color, but responding in the same tone didnt help anything out at all. Its tough, trust me, but try to be the better poster in that case.

[RodPed]

EarthDog, We were not "both essentially right." His central statement was that the problem I reported a problem with my system was, for him, obviously incorrect because his system did not have the same problem. I didn't ask that he be a mind reader, simply that he be polite and ask before insulting others. There was nothing logical in his responses. He was behavior was ignorant and rude. You're prepared to accept that. I'm not. That's all that remains to be said about it.

[EarthDog]

I agree it could have been handled differently...Both the assertion you didnt know what you were talking about, AND your reply to him were both out of sorts.

That said, again, you were both right and both logical in your stances with the information available at the time. This isnt something to get all hurt about, really. Now lets move past this please. Its LONG over.

[hokiealumnus]

RodPed, if oldbrave's behavior is "ignorant and rude", yours is pretentious and self-righteous. He didn't insult you, but you certainly have him. "You're an amateur" and "Now get a life." are unacceptable here. It's also petty and silly to correct people's spelling in an attempt to show you're smarter than they are. Give me a break man.

Let's sum up, shall we? You drudge up a nine month old thread to post a complaint about a board you admittedly tossed out without an updated BIOS. Apparently the issue has either since been resolved or is perhaps not as prevalent as you make it out to be.

All oldbrave did was relate his experience, though if you were extremely sensitive I suppose you might take exception to "you should check your sources", but you have to be looking for something to get upset about to have your reaction. Since his experience was contrary to yours, you seem to have gone on the attack. Stop it. Now. Else, you may find your stay here to be truncated before it otherwise would be if you stayed away from the personal attacks.