Another Raid 0 vs Single HDD

[darkxenon]

Hey sorry to add another thread about Raid 0 vs a single drive but i've looked around and there seems conflicting views. Currently im building a new system so far I have,

Cooler Master ATC-410-SX1
Hiper Type-R 580-Watt Power Supply
Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3
Crucial Ballistix 2GB PC2-6400C4 800MHz - Getting soon
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 - May get soon or wait for price drop
Artic Freezer 7
7800 GTX

I'm not too concerned about reliability as its going to mainly be a gaming rig and ill back my important data to dvd. I have maximum £75 buget for a HDD or 2 of them, (would like cheeper if possible). I just have some question I would be greatfull if anyone could answer.

Will a Raid 0 system boot much quicker than a single drive?
Will games install faster? How much?
Will games load faster? (For example a level on BF2142)

Any recomedations on what drives to get will be much apprieated

Thanks Dylan

 

[smids]

Getting 2 drives out of £75 is difficult, unless you simply buy two 160/200GB drives.

In answer to your questions (in order):

- not greatly, this is more dependent on seek (access times). Faster rpm drives have the benefit here.

- yes, about 150% faster (this is pretty much dependent on writes, which RAID0 is very good at)

- yes, about 150% faster (this is once again based on write; games use large files and these need to be precached - this is usually aided by the very high read of a RAID0).

The above is entirely theoretical but pretty much rings true.

With the price of some of the larger perp drives now, it may be advisable to buy 1 500GB drive e.g. WD 500GB AAKS - fast drive and very good value for the size.

If you want figures:

standard 7200rpm RAID0 (160/200GB) (parallel tech drive, i.e. the standard tech before the recent spate of drives) = 95MB/s read (average), 13ms access
Single perpendicular drive (500GB) = 70MB/s read (average), 13 ms access.

Single parallel tech drive: 50MB/s read (average), 13ms access

 

[darkxenon]

Wow thanks for the excellent reply, I think I'm gonna go for the AAKS. I've heard these mentioned a lot, is there anything special about them?

Dylan

 

[Fat Dog]

Getting 2 drives out of £75 is difficult, unless you simply buy two 160/200GB drives.

In answer to your questions (in order):

- not greatly, this is more dependent on seek (access times). Faster rpm drives have the benefit here.

- yes, about 150% faster (this is pretty much dependent on writes, which RAID0 is very good at)

- yes, about 150% faster (this is once again based on write; games use large files and these need to be precached - this is usually aided by the very high read of a RAID0).

The above is entirely theoretical but pretty much rings true.

With the price of some of the larger perp drives now, it may be advisable to buy 1 500GB drive e.g. WD 500GB AAKS - fast drive and very good value for the size.

If you want figures:

standard 7200rpm RAID0 (160/200GB) (parallel tech drive, i.e. the standard tech before the recent spate of drives) = 95MB/s read (average), 13ms access
Single perpendicular drive (500GB) = 70MB/s read (average), 13 ms access.

Single parallel tech drive: 50MB/s read (average), 13ms access

Alternative view:

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=1

 

[smids]

Alternative view:

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=1

I did explicitly say it was theoretical.

However, having used RAID0 and single disk systems for the last 3 years, I speak from first hand experience. It isn't 200% faster, as it ought to be in certain examples, but there is a benefit. I cannot say I have tried FarCry level loading tests but source etc games load a lot faster (subjectively). It also depends on the stripe level which can have a dramatic effect on the apparent speed.

Nothing particularly special about the AAKS - they are perpendicular technology and quite fast.