charloscarlies
Golden Member
- Feb 12, 2004
- 1,288
- 0
- 0
why do SO many people RAID0?
Because not everybody uses their rig primarily for games.
why do SO many people RAID0?
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: Tizyler
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: GZeus
I know it is hard to take the news, it was hard for me to read as well
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=1
Our very own anandtech did a great article on RAID0 and RAID1.
It turns out, than it every day use such as gaming and extraction, RAID0 on two drives will give you *maybe* a 3% increase in performance.
To me, a 3% increase in performance is not worth the doubled risk.
The truth can be cruel.
And so I ask myself... why do SO many people RAID0? Because they don't know, because, they just don't know
do you own these configs? i mange 3 of each. i even have raid5's of BOTH 74gb and 150gb raptors. i don't know? suuure... how could i possibly know? oh wait, u said "people" don't know -- thanks that was appreciated.
why do SO many people RAID0? i offer a different answer...
simply because i disagree -- no one should take that hard, it isn't personal. and i wouldn't dream of debating or arguing my reality with any well-read Core2Duo-overclocking, TuniqTower-cooling CCNA certified gamer.
again, in short... do what YOU WANT -- my only point. i hope that's not nearly as painful as your reading.. i can't imagine it would be.
I'm sure it wouldn't be time consuming or painful if you ever have to re-install your OS & softwares/restore data due to single drive failure in Raid0. :roll:
Originally posted by: rmrfhomeoops
Originally posted by: blacklit
I'm sure it wouldn't be time consuming or painful if you ever have to re-install your OS & softwares/restore data due to single drive failure in Raid0. :roll:Originally posted by: Tizyler
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: GZeus
aww, you still reinstall? that's cute .. my nephews do that. one of these days, i'll teach them how to image and reimage. although in time, i'm sure the little idiots will smarten up and figure out there's a better way to do things.
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: rmrfhomeoops
Originally posted by: blacklit
I'm sure it wouldn't be time consuming or painful if you ever have to re-install your OS & softwares/restore data due to single drive failure in Raid0. :roll:Originally posted by: Tizyler
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: GZeus
aww, you still reinstall? that's cute .. my nephews do that. one of these days, i'll teach them how to image and reimage. although in time, i'm sure the little idiots will smarten up and figure out there's a better way to do things.
I love it when tech-geeks thinks they're only one who does backup image. You must like to re-image often with your superior raid0 setup despite the marginal performance increase from raid0 for OS.
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: jamessb9
Originally posted by: GZeus
Good find OP!
These are excellent drives and this is a real good price.
If you really want to see 'em fly, put a pair in RAID0 with your OS on it. Windows loads like its sitting in RAM.
do they load that fast even though they're SATA 1.5gb/s?
Will i notice the speed if I am running it through one of those PNY/Netcell SCURE RAID Cards that only handle 1.5gb/s? THanks.
I read somewhere that no PC's can use more than the 1.5 currently, so that the drives that can go to 3.0 don't actually work faster.
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: Craig234
I got two, and am deciding whether the expected performance improvement is worth the 5x premium (half the size and more than twice the cost of 320GB 7200.10).
I see the oos broken heart posts and if I don't want to keep them, I'd rather they go to those people for the same price, but shipping is a hassle... pickup in the SF area east bay might be ok.
i dont' think it's worth it.. but it's subjective no? begs me to ask.. how frustrated do you get now with your wait-times? i doubt you even do ~
i [also] have the 320gb in raid (and single). my 74gb raids (and singles) are always faster.. and more audible. by how much, it varies ~16 seconds booting on one [loaded] pc. how many times do you expect to boot [in a hurry]?
Originally posted by: rmrfhomeoops
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: rmrfhomeoops
Originally posted by: blacklit
I'm sure it wouldn't be time consuming or painful if you ever have to re-install your OS & softwares/restore data due to single drive failure in Raid0. :roll:Originally posted by: Tizyler
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: GZeus
aww, you still reinstall? that's cute .. my nephews do that. one of these days, i'll teach them how to image and reimage. although in time, i'm sure the little idiots will smarten up and figure out there's a better way to do things.
I love it when tech-geeks thinks they're only one who does backup image. You must like to re-image often with your superior raid0 setup despite the marginal performance increase from raid0 for OS.
I'd hardly call increasing my computer's boot time by 20 seconds a marginal increase going from a single drive to a raid 0 (two 36gb raptors). My computer would boot into windows in about 60 seconds (counting bios). Now it boots in about 40 seconds, and that's including the time the raid controller takes.
As far as reliability, I personally am not concerned. I have not had a hard drive fail on me within the last 10 years, and I even had an IBM deathstar with no issues. These are server class drivers intended to be reliable.
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: blacklit
Originally posted by: Craig234
I got two, and am deciding whether the expected performance improvement is worth the 5x premium (half the size and more than twice the cost of 320GB 7200.10).
I see the oos broken heart posts and if I don't want to keep them, I'd rather they go to those people for the same price, but shipping is a hassle... pickup in the SF area east bay might be ok.
i dont' think it's worth it.. but it's subjective no? begs me to ask.. how frustrated do you get now with your wait-times? i doubt you even do ~
i [also] have the 320gb in raid (and single). my 74gb raids (and singles) are always faster.. and more audible. by how much, it varies ~16 seconds booting on one [loaded] pc. how many times do you expect to boot [in a hurry]?
I'm less frustrated with the boot time than while playing games, where the noticable delays are disk activity, like when you are loading things in an mmorpg.
Originally posted by: EarthwormJim
Originally posted by: rmrfhomeoops
Originally posted by: blacklit
aww, you still reinstall? that's cute .. my nephews do that. one of these days, i'll teach them how to image and reimage. although in time, i'm sure the little idiots will smarten up and figure out there's a better way to do things.
I love it when tech-geeks thinks they're only one who does backup image. You must like to re-image often with your superior raid0 setup despite the marginal performance increase from raid0 for OS.
I'd hardly call increasing my computer's boot time by 20 seconds a marginal increase going from a single drive to a raid 0 (two 36gb raptors). My computer would boot into windows in about 60 seconds (counting bios). Now it boots in about 40 seconds, and that's including the time the raid controller takes.
As far as reliability, I personally am not concerned. I have not had a hard drive fail on me within the last 10 years, and I even had an IBM deathstar with no issues. These are server class drivers intended to be reliable.
Originally posted by: masonardo
Kyle - You'll want to check your motherboard. CPU doesn't matter but some boards support raid and others don't. More newer boards seem to have it nowadays. It is easy to setup IMO. Like the speed difference, it's all relative. Driver support for raid cards/chipsets can be also hit and miss with OS's other than XP.
Originally posted by: masonardo
Steven the Leech - Picked up one of the same 74GB raptors at BB yesterday. Just for kicks here are my specs using the same HDTach version for comparison, just no raid.
Burst speed: 135.7
Random access: 8.0ms
Average read: 77.4 mb/s
I've used raid 0 with other drives for a long time. It can be a little more work for os installs and more risk but it is defintely faster. I don't have a floppy drive on my setup anymore so I just slipstream the raid drivers with nlite. I wanted to try one of these first but I'm happy with it so I'm heading back to BB to pick up another and will raid 0 them. Quiet and fast.
Kyle - You'll want to check your motherboard. CPU doesn't matter but some boards support raid and others don't. More newer boards seem to have it nowadays. It is easy to setup IMO. Like the speed difference, it's all relative. Driver support for raid cards/chipsets can be also hit and miss with OS's other than XP.
Originally posted by: masonardo
Steven the Leech - Picked up one of the same 74GB raptors at BB yesterday. Just for kicks here are my specs using the same HDTach version for comparison, just no raid.
Burst speed: 135.7
Random access: 8.0ms
Average read: 77.4 mb/s
I've used raid 0 with other drives for a long time. It can be a little more work for os installs and more risk but it is defintely faster. I don't have a floppy drive on my setup anymore so I just slipstream the raid drivers with nlite. I wanted to try one of these first but I'm happy with it so I'm heading back to BB to pick up another and will raid 0 them. Quiet and fast.
Kyle - You'll want to check your motherboard. CPU doesn't matter but some boards support raid and others don't. More newer boards seem to have it nowadays. It is easy to setup IMO. Like the speed difference, it's all relative. Driver support for raid cards/chipsets can be also hit and miss with OS's other than XP.
Originally posted by: masonardo
Got my raptor raid 0 setup today after picking up another at BB.
HDTach numbers:
Burst speed: 164.0 mb/s
Random access: 8.6ms
Average read: 128.9mb/s
I also ran PCMark05 before and after and I can tell you that the numbers were similar, roughly 25-35% faster for general use. There are plenty of other benchmarks done by reputable sites (extremetech, tomsh) that show similar numbers with raid 0. Theoretically you're doubling the throughput, but after overhead it ends up being 1/4-1/3 faster generally than a single raptor. Regardless it's definitely more than 3%... Plus you are doubling the available space, the add'l performance is just bonus.