Associate
Im thinking about getting a RAID controller for my PC for storeage as i have a lot of data and RAID would make it more fault torrelernt. Any recommendations??
Hardware raid
- Thread starter Ghost
- Start date
yes it is, cause i was gonna use raid 5, which is fault tolorent 
(i work with servers i know) but as far as personal ones go i was wondering what the best solution would be
(i work with servers i know) but as far as personal ones go i was wondering what the best solution would be
kool, that has really helped cause i was looking at was the 180 - 200 pound one on yer list as the best solution and sorry yes it would have been sataII raid using PCI express, so thanks for the help. And would the one above be one of the ones u mentioned cause i believe it is cheers also the top level one tho would be nice and shiny but tooooo much money even tho it would be stupidly fast
sorry, that was silly of me to have that link *slaps self*
as the best solution and sorry yes it would have been sataII raid using PCI express, so thanks for the help. And would the one above be one of the ones u mentioned cause i believe it is cheers also the top level one tho would be nice and shiny but tooooo much money even tho it would be stupidly fastsorry, that was silly of me to have that link *slaps self*
Last edited:
sorry, hope thats better now
Cheers i will do
That was the point, all i was after was advice on which controller to get, as software raid is not as quick as hardware raid, i mean a good example of speed is a SAN
which is silly quick, and they very clever as well which would explain y u can expect to pay silly amount and no home user would ever have one. I mean possibly the most fault tolerent would be raid 0+1 but i could be wrong and RAID 5 is considered true raid as u can in some setups lose more than one drive, or if u have hot swaps available then it will rebuild itself if its a very clever controller e.g. in a SAN or similar. What would you say is the best RAID for redundancy and mass storage e.g. lose a drive but no lose of data and say 900GB + of storage space
which is silly quick, and they very clever as well which would explain y u can expect to pay silly amount and no home user would ever have one. I mean possibly the most fault tolerent would be raid 0+1 but i could be wrong and RAID 5 is considered true raid as u can in some setups lose more than one drive, or if u have hot swaps available then it will rebuild itself if its a very clever controller e.g. in a SAN or similar. What would you say is the best RAID for redundancy and mass storage e.g. lose a drive but no lose of data and say 900GB + of storage space