SOFTRAID SOFTWARE FULL

No matter, the take-away was there was little difference between using DU vs. The BlackMagic rates for writes were quite bad but the reads were close to what AJA displayed (does BlackMagic avoid using the kernel file buffer cache?). The AJA data rates came out to be around 518 MB/s for writes and a bit less at 490 MB/s for reads, using 1GB file sizes. Using AJA and BlackMagic I found little difference between using DU and SoftRAID. In each case I set the RAID-0 transfer block size to 128Kb. The TB4m was directly attached to the MBP using Apple's USB-C-to-TB2 adapter.Īfter configuring these 4x BarraCuda drives as RAID-0 using both DU and SoftRAID I used AJA, BlackMagic Disk Test and the Terminal command dd to establish some data rates for each. I ran the tests under Catalina 10.15.3 (Build 19D49f) on my late 2016 15' rMBP13,3.

The 5TB disks were freshly erased and formatted as HFS+. With this unclear issue of which is best, DU or SoftRAID, I’ve spent a limited amount of time to see just what the differences are configuring RAID-0 on a set of 4x 5TB 2.5” Seagate BarraCuda 5400 RPM spinning disks in an OWC Thunderbolt 2 mini 4 enclosure (TB4m). I’m unclear what the basis is for this claimed 85%. In some articles I’ve read there’s mention that SoftRAID offers as much as 85% better RAID-0 performance than for DU’s RAID-0.

SoftRAID for configuring RAID-0 for our MP7,1’s internal/external units in particular our Sonnet PCIe card with its 4x Samsung SSD/Flash blades. Today, I’m wrestling with the use of DU vs. The prospect of configuring RAID-5 using SoftRAID appealed to me for protecting against a single drive failure.

SOFTRAID SOFTWARE FULL

I’ve been using Apple’s Disk Utility (DU) for ages and purchased a SoftRAID full license in Dec 2015 to handle RAID sets beyond what DU offered. Subject: Pros & Cons using Apple’s Disk Utility vs.

Softraid software