Raptor or RAID?

PhillyDee

PhillyDee

PhillyDee

Soldato
Joined
12 Feb 2007
Posts
14,116
Location
South Shields
Ive currently got a 150Gb Raptor bought the back end of last year.
Since im sitting here with my head in my hands nursing a hangover (PC is too loud, it hurts my head), im wondering if i should go and RAID maybe 2x320Gb harddrives and get rid of the raptor. Has anyone gone from a raptor to a RAID set and regretted it? (I know it doubles disk failure chances etc).
 
PhillyDee said:
Ive currently got a 150Gb Raptor bought the back end of last year.
Since im sitting here with my head in my hands nursing a hangover (PC is too loud, it hurts my head), im wondering if i should go and RAID maybe 2x320Gb harddrives and get rid of the raptor. Has anyone gone from a raptor to a RAID set and regretted it? (I know it doubles disk failure chances etc).
Click to expand...

Well a raptor is faster at loading things than a raid array because it has less latency.
 
Energize said:
Well a raptor is faster at loading things than a raid array because it has less latency.
Click to expand...

What makes you say that? I thought the general consensus was Latency is reduced as more spindles (drives) are added?


In a RAID 1 setup there is 2x read performance + redundancy. Although latency is the same.

Aren't the new Seagate .10 drives supposed to be very fast, i.e. as fast as the raptors.
 
whitecrook said:
What makes you say that? I thought the general consensus was Latency is reduced as more spindles (drives) are added?
Click to expand...

No because in raid 0 the data your seeking is only on one of the disks so it takes just as long as it would with a single drive to find data. You get the same latency with redundant arrays as well unless the controller supports split seeks in which case it can look for the same piece of data on all the drives and one is more likely to find it faster than the average seek time. If you look at hd tach benchmarks, most raid 1 arrays only give the same read performance as a single drive because the controller doesn't support reading from both drives at once. Though with a decent controller raid 1 will give better read performance than raid 0.

whitecrook said:
Aren't the new Seagate .10 drives supposed to be very fast, i.e. as fast as the raptors.
Click to expand...

With throughput they are close, but they don't come close to the raptors for seek times.
 
Last edited:
Energize said:
No because in raid 0 the data your seeking is only on one of the disks so it takes just as long as it would with a single drive to find data. You get the same latency with redundant arrays as well unless the controller supports split seeks in which case it can look for the same piece of data on all the drives and one is more likely to find it faster than the average seek time. If you look at hd tach benchmarks, most raid 1 arrays only give the same read performance as a single drive because the controller doesn't support reading from both drives at once.
Click to expand...

RAID 0 is striping, this means the data is placed accross all the disks. This is the point of RAID0. It decreases access time and improves r/w speeds. If this wan't the case then everyone would just use JBOD.

If a drive controller doesn't support reading from both drives at once, then it is broken. That is what it is for.

edit:

Hmmm a sneaky edit :)

Yes I agree.

<edit again>

OK RAID doesn't really decrease latency.

For the OP : http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/03/12/cheap_raid_ravages_wd_raptor/index.html

Summary : Raptor Wins, except for massive sequential reads, and cost per GB.
 
Last edited:
Well, looks like im keeping the raptor. Many thanks. I was aware of the latencies and seek times etc., was mostly curious as to the real world difference.
 
You could always get another raptor. But tbh i cant see why in gaming you would ever need two raptors it doesn't improve the game performance just speeds up its loading of maps. to pay 150 quid to get maps to load a bit faster isn't worth it tbh.

khushy said:
I have 4 Raptor 150's in a RAID 10 - nice!

khushy
Click to expand...

Was that just to grow his E-penis because i cant see a point in him saying that?
 
some people . . .

8igdave said:
You could always get another raptor. But tbh i cant see why in gaming you would ever need two raptors it doesn't improve the game performance just speeds up its loading of maps. to pay 150 quid to get maps to load a bit faster isn't worth it tbh.



Was that just to grow his E-penis because i cant see a point in him saying that?
Click to expand...

just critisise EVERYTHING - 8IGdave (and you named yourself this because???) - LOL!!!

khushy
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom