Must have fastest disks

Associate
Joined
17 Mar 2005
Posts
165
I'm considering getting a pair of raptors - one for the system and the other for programs + data

Would it be faster to have a pair of 7200 drives in raid 0 run off the motherboard raid controller? Is integrated raid fast?
 
copsey:

Agree with what matt has said.

If you don't need/want quick Access times, ie < 8ms, I would just buy 2 x 320GB 7200.10s and RAID0 those instead of buying 2 Raptors. 2 of the new 16MB cache Raptors won't give you much more of an increase in Average read over the 2 x 320GB 7200.10s, what it will give you an advantage in, is the Access time, ie 7200.10s, 13ms, Raptors < 8ms, however, with the Raptors, you get less GBs for your £, that the 7200.10s.

When you RAID0 the 7200.10s, try using a stripe of 32KB, a good general size for running all kinds of applications. :)
 
When you RAID0 the 7200.10s, try using a stripe of 32KB, a good general size for running all kinds of applications.


Thats exactly what i used! 32k stripe. and another point i forgot how noisy my 15K scsi drives are.duel boot. these seagate 10's are so quiet and i used to use raptor drives which were also noisy.

I have an earlyer seagate 250g SATA1 think its a 9 that i use for storage. anyway it dosnt come close on performance to the 10's but has been 100% reliable as a storage drive.

If WD were to bring out a SATA2 10.000rpm 16m raptor at 150g + i would imagine they would fly. but at the moment the transfere rate these 10's get is impresive! and the main reason i choose them over the 16m raptors. As a plus look at the price performance! the seagate drives are a great buy!
 
cheers guys
I just want the fastest - I don't really mind if I get less space as I already have a hardware RAID 5 array for storage. I want the fastest to load vista & apps. From the access times you quote, it sounds like a single raptor for system and a single raptor for apps might be the quickest?
 
Back
Top Bottom