Is a single drive JBOD array better than IDE

SithUK · 27 Jul 2007 at 20:16

I have a RAID0 array setup and have just bought a new 500Gg drive to replace them.

If I want to use the standalone drive in the system with the raid array I have to setup the drive as a single disc JBOD array on the RAID controller.

I need to run the two at the same time so I can transfer my files across to the new drive.

Is there a performance advantage (CPU, HD transfer rate, etc.) to having a SATA2 hard drive as an IDE master instead of using the onboard RAID controller to manage the array?

I'd imagine the resource usage, and therefore heat generation from the chipset, is minimal between using the IDE controller or the RAID controller? There is however the extra 5 or so secs on bootup for the RAID controller to initialise. There is no noticable time for the IDE to initialise so score one for the IDE route?

I appreciate that if I do transfer all my files onto a JBOD array I will not be able to access them if I disable RAID and make the drive into an IDE drive as I'll have to reformat. I'm backing up now for just an eventuality.

So the question is: is a single drive JBOD RAID array better than setting the disk as a master IDE drive for performance?

I'll suffer the pain if I have to do this. I didn't build a custom watercooled pc without enjoying the geekery of it all :-)

I have the MSI K8N Neo4 mainboard.
500Gg SATA2 drive.

fobose · 27 Jul 2007 at 22:58

Obviously everyone else is thinking W..T..F as they haven't replied. So I will say W....T..F!!! Just use whatever is convenient, there wont be any performance gain from using one to the other. Does the time it takes really worry you? Just leave it going over night!!! :rolleyes:

SithUK · 27 Jul 2007 at 23:08

Fobose: I've searched everywhere on the net for an answer. I couldn't find one. Its likely no-one replied with an answer because no-one has benchmarked the two single hard drive control options or has read a review with the benchmarks and can give me a link.

If I just wanted to get on with it and didn't care about performance I'd have bought a mac and wouldn't be posting to a hard core PC geek forum like overclockers now would I.

fobose · 27 Jul 2007 at 23:39

Obviously I read your intial post wrong. I thought you just wanted to use your 500GB drive instead of your RAID 0 array, and had to transfer data from RAID 0 array to the 500GB.

From what you said I thought this was going to be a one time only transfer.

<edit> after re-reading your post twice more (had a little to drink tonight

), you could partition your 500GB, copy the files to the secondary (storage) partition, then use the hard drive in IDE mode so you dont have to wait for the raid bios and install windows on the smaller partition.

I do actually have the same hard drive on my RAID controller using JBOD (promise controller) which used to be on my intel controller (SATA/IDE mode) and the speed in HD tach is exactly the same of 57MB/s (old seagate 300GB 7200.8 - used to be my OS drive).