RAID and other related questions?

manoz · 18 Sep 2006 at 23:03

Hello, looking at the 74gb raptor and figured I could get two 80gb and one 250gb for the same price(all SATA 2). I'm a n00b at HDDs so will it be better if I get the 74gb raptor or put the two 80gb HDDs in RAID 0?(forget taking the 250gb into account since I back up externally anyway) It's gona be used for workstation and some gaming.

If the two 80gb HDDs are better, which ones would you recommend for performance?(Shame there is no 7200.10 in 80gb

).

Thanks

EDIT: Is it possible to have 3 HDDs in RAID 0 or does it have to be an even numbers?Cheers.

Tony Williams · 18 Sep 2006 at 23:13

Sorry man, I don't understand ...

... how are you planning on setting these up, like this?

2 x 80GB RAID 0 (WINDOWS)
1 x 250GB

manoz · 18 Sep 2006 at 23:14

Yeah that's what I meant. 2 80gb in RAID 0 and 250gb storage.Better then a raptor?

Tony Williams · 18 Sep 2006 at 23:32

Having two hard disks RAIDED wont improve performance as far as I know it just merges the two drives into one (don't quote me on that)

You would be better with the RAPTOR - however they are much LOUDER than your normal disk.

manoz · 18 Sep 2006 at 23:34

I thought the whole point of RAID 0 is that it would improve performance? I know it won't be exactly twice as much cos of the overheads but I just wana know whether it's better then a raptor. I can't find any benchmark comparisons etc.

Dist · 18 Sep 2006 at 23:41

RAID can improve performance, its JBOD (Just a Bunch Of Disks) that just merges the drives into one and do nothing else.

RAID 0 splits the data across the 2 hdds, so instead of 1 hdd that has 1 large chunk of data, where it has to load it all, with raid 0, the 2nd hdd can read part of the file at the same time the first hdd is reading part of the file, thus improving read speed (write speed is still the same).

no idea whats best myself though, was just explaining raid

Tony Williams · 18 Sep 2006 at 23:47

Yes, I've just read that now. Personally you might be better off with 1 x 160GB for Windows, newer SATA drives are coming closer to RAPTORS performance wise, it's weather you want to shell out the extra. :O

EDIT - ALSO in a RAID 0 config, each drive is dependant on each other so you'll end up in a sticky mess if one fails.

manoz · 19 Sep 2006 at 00:05

Dist said:
RAID can improve performance, its JBOD (Just a Bunch Of Disks) that just merges the drives into one and do nothing else.

RAID 0 splits the data across the 2 hdds, so instead of 1 hdd that has 1 large chunk of data, where it has to load it all, with raid 0, the 2nd hdd can read part of the file at the same time the first hdd is reading part of the file, thus improving read speed (write speed is still the same).

no idea whats best myself though, was just explaining raid

Yeah the increased read speed would be great for games but the write speed is the same(or slightly less) and that would be a shame for writing large CAD files. Hmmm, what to do? I could get 2x250gb 7200.10(16mb cache) for slightly more then one raptor. Maybe those would be better in RAID cos they are the best 7200rpm HDDs?

smids · 19 Sep 2006 at 00:41

Oh dear, oh dear....

manoz: Your original setup suggestion was perfect. 2x80GB in RAID0 with backup on the 250 or externally...

This is virtually what I do and it is better than a raptor. The raptor will feel slightly faster due to half the seek time but I personally can attest to the speed of a RAID0 array. I have owned all sorts of drives including all the raptors at some point and I think the extra space you get with 80GB RAID0 is better.

RAID0 - 2 drives or more (any number, odd or even, up to controller supported max) - read 175% of one drive. Write 175% of one drive approx.

manoz · 19 Sep 2006 at 08:39

smids said:
Oh dear, oh dear....

manoz: Your original setup suggestion was perfect. 2x80GB in RAID0 with backup on the 250 or externally...

This is virtually what I do and it is better than a raptor. The raptor will feel slightly faster due to half the seek time but I personally can attest to the speed of a RAID0 array. I have owned all sorts of drives including all the raptors at some point and I think the extra space you get with 80GB RAID0 is better.

RAID0 - 2 drives or more (any number, odd or even, up to controller supported max) - read 175% of one drive. Write 175% of one drive approx.

Ok I'll go for 2 or 3 80gb HDDs then, cos I wasn't sure if I can have an odd number.

Which 80gb HDDs are the best out at the mo? Hard to decide.

smids · 19 Sep 2006 at 09:42

Hmm, Hitachi or Seagate. I use Hitachi as they are faster (come on Seagate, get the 7200.10 released!).

snowdog · 19 Sep 2006 at 18:54

yeah i have 2 seagates 250 gb in raid 0 mode and in benchmarks its faster as a raptor, 2x80 gb definatly, just dont forget to set it in raid 0 not raid 1 or any other raid mode...
In theory, raid 0 would be twice as fast with 2 hdd's, triple speed with 3, etc... till a limit like tranfer rate comes in ( hard to reach that with sataII tho) , in real life its like 75% boost with each hdd in both writing and reading(2hdd's 175% of original speed, 3hdd 250% of original speed, etc...) , just renember its very low error tolerant.

manoz · 20 Sep 2006 at 01:06

Yeah I heard about the error tolerance but hopefully it should all go smoothly. So I'm getting 2 80gb Hitachi Deskstars and a 250gb Seagate 7200.10. Thanks for the help peeps.

smids · 20 Sep 2006 at 01:12

manoz said:
Yeah I heard about the error tolerance but hopefully it should all go smoothly. So I'm getting 2 80gb Hitachi Deskstars and a 250gb Seagate 7200.10. Thanks for the help peeps.

An excellent choice - VERY similar to mine in 2x 80GB Deskstars RAID0 + 320GB Seagate 7200.10 (and a 2x80GB Hitachi RAID1 for good measure

).

manoz · 20 Sep 2006 at 01:25

smids said:
An excellent choice - VERY similar to mine in 2x 80GB Deskstars RAID0 + 320GB Seagate 7200.10 (and a 2x80GB Hitachi RAID1 for good measure ).

Yeah I was gona go for the RAID 0 + 1 but if I do that I won't have a storage drive. can only spend around 120 quid on HDDs. Maybe later on when I get some more moneys

ernysmuntz · 20 Sep 2006 at 09:28

Half the posts here are based on heresay and word of mouth

EDIT- sorry no they're not, just the 1 poster.

I've been using RAID0 for the last 5 years on loads of different drives, 2x80GB, 2x160GB and now I use 4x250GB drives.

The speed difference compared to a "non-raided"

setup is immeasurable, it feels like when you go from 512MB to 1GB of RAM.

Windows loads faster
Games load faster
All programs load faster

I'm sick to death of reading people saying RAID0 doesn't speed things up, its an insult to ones intelligence. And basically just shows theirs.

Obviously if your only playing games more than 3 years old, or just browsing the web, your not going to see a difference. But then you wouldn't be asking the question then I would think.

Never believe anything anyone says about RAID0 unless they clearly tell you that they've tried it!

Most people who bad mouth it, run a few benchmarks or whatever and come to some conclusion based on that, or they haven't even tried it and are just quoting articles from places around the net that say it doesn't help at all.

2 of my Hitachi drives in RAID0 is faster than a Raptor 150GB, 4 drives don't improve speeds that much but its still noticeable over 2 drives.

ernysmuntz · 20 Sep 2006 at 09:29

I've had the drives in my sig setup for about 18 months with no problems at all. I wouldn't keep important data on a RAID0 array, but then its not for important data, thats kept on an external drive.