SSD vs SAS. Which one is better in performance?

I'll give you the short end of the stick...

SSD is better. They are faster, more reliable and more fault tolerant. SAS will be cheaper though.
 
Completely depends upon what the use of it would be.

For instance, if your looking to carry out database intensive tasks and they involve mainly writing then a SAS raid array would be the way to go.

However, if it is mostly reading then the SSD is probably the best solution.
 
Give me more RAM over SSDs any day.
We use SSDs, but they are not as reliable as SAS drives, but they are reliable enough to not worry about (especially as they are always RAIDed).

We've found them to be around 10x as fast in hosting and 20x as fast for databases.

When we upgraded our servers to 128GB of RAM from 64GB, we noticed however that the older machines without SSDs all but matched the machines with SSDs, as mostly everything was being served from memory cache and the spindles were not being touched.
 
Hi,

There may be lot to discuss on it. You can refer to the below link to get some understanding on it.
datanami.com/2015/12/03/which-type-of-ssd-is-best-sata-sas-or-pcie/
 
SAS is not mutually exclusive from SSD. You can easilly have a Serial attached SSD, but for the purposes of this argument, I'm going to take it that you're comparing Mechanical vs Solid State Flash Drives.

From a web hosting perspective, SSD is going to be better as you get much better read/writes from random parts of the drive. Generally in Web Hosting you need smaller chunks read and returned. There is also a massive cache to handle the retrival of information.

The mechanical has an advantage when you're doing sequential writes (storing large files etc - awesome for Video/Backups etc).

So for short burst performance, SSD is great.

SSD will cost more money, and while the cost is coming down, they're still not quite even. The lifespan of an SSDis insane though - so well worth the money.

Cost is still the big factor from a data center provisioning factor. They spent lots of money on Spinning Drives, so they'll still offer those as they haven't reached their End of Life cycle. But for the extra few dollars, it's worth going SSD, from a user perspective.
 
SSD is rather still expensive these days.

an example is i recently purchased a new PC

A 60GB KINGSTON V300 SATA3 - 6Gb/s SSD £45.00
A 1TB SEAGATE SATA3 - 6Gb/s, 7200 RPM & 64MB Cache HDD £12.60

so which is the better option
 
SSD
- improves websites performance.
- has remarkable improvement on Web Hosting Speed.
- are reliable and avoids loss of data using controllers.
- are highly stable, allows websites load faster and boost uptime.
 
Both are Good, SSD is Better and expensive. A combination of both brings the SSD performance you need and also checks on the Price. Since its possible to marry the two I would go with the best of both.
 
For speed and reliability, hands down SSD. Just make sure you backup continually (ideally to HDD on another server ;)).
 
As far as performance goes, SSD>SAS since they have flash based memory, but they have less capacity per drive and cost more. Choosing drives based on price, capacity and performance for certain situation would be good and cost-efficient, but it takes huge effort and that’s why most just pick one over the other.
 
Most of our potential customers asks and use SSD, and was very happy when we introduced SSD availability, speed Is big factor here.
 
Cost, capacity and reliability are factors for why SSD adoption hasn't occurred at all levels. SSDs cost more than SAS disks for a given capacity.

But in general, servers don't actually come with a particular type of disk. Storage is something that is configured afterwards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Supporters

Back
Top