3x Raptors on P5W DH

[dragonhunter]

I did search and can not find the answer.
-So can I run 3x Raptors in Raid 0 using the Intel ICH7? thanks

[k0nsl]

Yes.

-k0nsl

[Durzel]

Would 3 Raptors in RAID 0 give much of a performance boost over 2?

[lawrywild]

probably not much but since when did that stop enthusiasts buying stuff :D

[dragonhunter]

Would 3 Raptors in RAID 0 give much of a performance boost over 2?

I would think so, don't you? someone advice pls

[safan80]

the answer is yes you'll see a performance boost but 4x is much faster.
also if you used an areca card it would be a lot faster.
http://tweakers.net/reviews/557/1

gamepc raptor raid test
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=raptor150raid&page=1
make a note that the 74GB drives are the 8MB cache version they noww have 74GB raptor with 16MB cache. you can go to newegg.com to check it out or some other place.

[Pandamonia]

im sure the raid controller on this board cant handle 4.

same with the Amd boards,

for 3 raptors or 4 i would get a raid controller, but i think they are expensive

[Burner27]

RAID 0 is a waste unless you are transferring huge files, doing video encoding or audio encoding or streaming. Other than that---it's just not worth it.

[safan80]

RAID 0 is a waste unless you are transferring huge files, doing video encoding or audio encoding or streaming. Other than that---it's just not worth it.


not true FUD boy. you can gear a raid array for small files. my array on my gaming machine is geared that way. files extractions go much faster and defraging blazes. for the other: check out this raid page http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98643&highlight=crappy there's info on page 3 that I'd posted that will help you configure your raid array.

[Burner27]

not true FUD boy. you can gear a raid array for small files. my array on my gaming machine is geared that way. files extractions go much faster and defraging blazes. for the other: check out this raid page http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98643&highlight=crappy there's info on page 3 that I'd posted that will help you configure your raid array.

That's SYNTHETIC benchmarking there--not REAL WORLD.

[safan80]

That's SYNTHETIC benchmarking there--not REAL WORLD.

duh! every Benchmarking program is synthetic!!! I made no mention of the benchmarks now did I?

[lawrywild]

I think a lot of people seem to forget that raid 0 is not JUST the extra speed.. your getting double the storage aswell as the speed..

[safan80]

I think a lot of people seem to forget that raid 0 is not JUST the extra speed.. your getting double the storage aswell as the speed..


but also it's like be able to multitask as well. you can copy files while playing mp3s off an array.

[Burner27]

but also it's like be able to multitask as well. you can copy files while playing mp3s off an array.


Where the heck did you get that information from? Making two drives into a RAID 0 doesn't increase a drive's ability to multitask. Back that information up with an article please.

By the way--read this:

http://faq.storagereview.com/tiki-index.php?page=SingleDriveVsRaid0

RAID 0 while is does increase your HDD space also increases the chance of failure. You double your chances of losing information that is not backed up if one of your drives fails.

[Burner27]

duh! every Benchmarking program is synthetic!!! I made no mention of the benchmarks now did I?


You referred to the article--it displays benchmarks.

[Stigma]

I would think so, don't you? someone advice pls

Very little, except maybye for editing very large files - like working with HD-resolution video editing.

For gaming and other general use, I'm pretty sure the difference would be negible. I won't recommend adding another drive if speed is your primary goal. If you realy have enough money to waste on it, then an iRAM solid-state disk to run your most important stuff from would yield you waaaay faster disk performance than any number of raptors in stripe RAID.

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2480

It might be hella expensive pr. gig, but with a setup like that, it would basicly mean your harddrive would never be the bottleneck, as the performance compared to mechanical drives (even in stripe RAID) is stellar.

-Stigma

[Brahmzy]

RAID 0 is a waste unless you are transferring huge files, doing video encoding or audio encoding or streaming. Other than that---it's just not worth it.

So not true. I ran my 2 WD740ADFD Raptors in non-RAID for about a week and switched them to RAID0. Holy smokes. EVERYTHING was faster. loading apps, booting, surfing, gaming, shutting down - EVERYTHING. These new 16mb cache Raptors in RAID0 are simply SICK.

[gr8golf]

RAID 0 is a waste unless you are transferring huge files, doing video encoding or audio encoding or streaming. Other than that---it's just not worth it.


Just curious Burner27 - have you ever set up RAID0 on your own rig?

[Ace-a-Rue]

I think a lot of people seem to forget that raid 0 is not JUST the extra speed.. your getting double the storage aswell as the speed..

i would not recommend that anyone use raid 0 as a storage...to easy to get burned if the raid array becomes corrupted...best to use raid 1 as a minimum for a back up to the array and storage protection

[BlazingArrow]

Where the heck did you get that information from? Making two drives into a RAID 0 doesn't increase a drive's ability to multitask. Back that information up with an article please.

By the way--read this:

http://faq.storagereview.com/tiki-in...leDriveVsRaid0

RAID 0 while is does increase your HDD space also increases the chance of failure. You double your chances of losing information that is not backed up if one of your drives fails.


Dude, your making this huge point about RAID 0 not being worth it, can I ask have you ever owned WD Raptor raid hard drives? Well first off, the 36 gigs are MADE to be in a raid set up...they are simply useless by themselves. Do you know what RAID 0 even is?? It's basically making your two hard drives work as one single hard drive. Trust me, it increases performance dramatically. I have never ever ran a benchmark for my harddrives, because personally the second I had these in raid 0 over a year ago, i new i would NEVER go back because the performance to me far outways any risk of loosing data...I back up important things anyway.


:slapass: :slapass:

[Ender17]

files extractions go much faster and defraging blazes.
faster than using two single drives?
I don't know of a legitimate way to test defragmentation performance, but I always advise having a seperate partition just for windows so it doesn't take long to defrag anyway

I think a lot of people seem to forget that raid 0 is not JUST the extra speed.. your getting double the storage aswell as the speed..
well of course you get twice the space, but that's because you bought two drives, not because you put them in RAID-0

but also it's like be able to multitask as well. you can copy files while playing mp3s off an array.
once again, you'd get just as good, if not better performance using two single drives

So not true. I ran my 2 WD740ADFD Raptors in non-RAID for about a week and switched them to RAID0. Holy smokes. EVERYTHING was faster. loading apps, booting, surfing, gaming, shutting down - EVERYTHING. These new 16mb cache Raptors in RAID0 are simply SICK.
Do you have any type of data to back up these claims? It's very easy to whip out the stopwatch and jot down some numbers.

Loading Apps? I can post numerous articles that show no benifit in app loading times.
Booting windows should show about a 20% improvement or so.
Surfing? RAID-0 made your internets faster? Yeah right.
Gaming? Level loading times or FPS? Once again, all reviews I've seen show little to no improvement on loading times and I really hope you aren't claiming a FPS increase.
Shutting down? I don't know about this one. Maybe there is a huge improvement. My single Raptor only takes about 10 seconds to shutdown.

Dude, your making this huge point about RAID 0 not being worth it, can I ask have you ever owned WD Raptor raid hard drives? Well first off, the 36 gigs are MADE to be in a raid set up...they are simply useless by themselves. Do you know what RAID 0 even is?? It's basically making your two hard drives work as one single hard drive. Trust me, it increases performance dramatically. I have never ever ran a benchmark for my harddrives, because personally the second I had these in raid 0 over a year ago, i new i would NEVER go back because the performance to me far outways any risk of loosing data...I back up important things anyway.


:slapass: :slapass:
The current WD360GD Raptors are beaten by most current 7200 drives. The newer WD360ADFD ones should be an improvement if the WD740ADFD and WD1500ADFD are any indication.
The Raptors are not "MADE to be in a raid set up" anymore than any other drive from a performance standpoint.
As for the rest of your post, frankly it's a bunch of BS - show me where RAID-0 improves performance in anything besides synthetic benchmarks and where two single drives wouldn't work just as well.

[Brahmzy]

Ender, have you ever personally owned 2 WD740ADFD Raptors in RAID0?

Didn't think so.

Don't try to tell me what I am experienceing isn't real. I get tired of that. I get tired of people hating on RAID0. This is not my first time using RAID0 and won't be the last.

I don't have the time or desire to do a bunch of benchmarking work just to please you. If you're ignorant in this area, that's your fault. Go research things for yourself and fix your friggin' attitude. Sheesh!

[syne_24]

lol raid-hater!

I can vouch for windows booting/shutdown atleast 2x faster depending on what strip block you use. I had 64k block for movie ripping before and switch back to 16k and noticed I boot within 2 bars (window xp logon thingy) Raid-0 is not a waste if you know how to set it up for your specifice needs.

[safan80]

once again, you'd get just as good, if not better performance using two single drives

not true.. Think about it, in a 2 drive raid0 array half the data is on each of the two drives where as in a single drive all the data is on one drive.


i would not recommend that anyone use raid 0 as a storage...to easy to get burned if the raid array becomes corrupted...best to use raid 1 as a minimum for a back up to the array and storage protection

raid0 is for speed. I don't expect to keep anything I need on it. I built a file server that uses raid5 to keep my data on. and if I was really paranoid of drive failure I'd use raid6.

[catscit]

raid 0 is definetly for speed.
I have 2 wd raptor 74GB 16MB in raid 0 on the asus p5w dh
Soon there will be 4 (already ordered, waiting for shipping).
raid 0 is VERY fast.
map load times for bf2 for example rely mostly on disk performance.
I'm the first in the game everytime and i run a d820 as cpu at the moment!!!

the performance increase from 2 > 4 isn't as much as from 1 > 2 but this is xtreme systems isn't it? I can't believe i have to explain the performance advantage here.

raid 0 rocks and when 1 disk fails, you loose all data. Be prepared and love the speed.

people posting here raid 0 isn't worth it haven't tried it i think.
I know people running 2 pata drives in raid 0, just to decrease bf2 load times!

[OBR]

Yes, on my setup are 3 Raptor working perfectly. Connect it to SATA1,SATA3,SATA4 ... and enjoy the BRUTAL performance ...

[Ender17]

Ender, have you ever personally owned 2 WD740ADFD Raptors in RAID0?

Didn't think so.

Don't try to tell me what I am experienceing isn't real. I get tired of that. I get tired of people hating on RAID0. This is not my first time using RAID0 and won't be the last.

I don't have the time or desire to do a bunch of benchmarking work just to please you. If you're ignorant in this area, that's your fault. Go research things for yourself and fix your friggin' attitude. Sheesh!
No I have not, but it is almost worth buying another one just to prove you wrong.

It is real, it's called the placebo effect. People "hate" on RAID-0 because idiots like you think it's the holy grail and makes everything from surfing the internet to gaming faster. It does not. There are some things that do benefit from it, but they are few and far between. If you understood anything about how it actually works or how a computer works you would see why your claims make 0 sense.

You are the one with a bad attidude. Do not call me ignorant when I can assure you I have done more reading and research on the topic than you have.
But wait, you don't have the time or desire to do any benchmarking (or research, reading, etc) that might support your ridiculous claims which are contradicted by every RAID-0 article I've read.

Personally, I'm tired of your "n00bie" posts spamming up the Intel forums here and at [H]. It's obvious you don't have a clue what you're doing. I've already called your BS when you claimed the 120mm fan in your Antec Trio was "HUGE - bigger than a 120mm for sure."
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1029796831&postcount=23
and I'm calling it again. Until you have some evidence, don't waste my time.

[Ender17]

not true.. Think about it, in a 2 drive raid0 array half the data is on each of the two drives where as in a single drive all the data is on one drive.
That's true, but maybe I don't understand what you were describing in the initial post, please clarify.

[Ender17]

raid 0 is definetly for speed.
I have 2 wd raptor 74GB 16MB in raid 0 on the asus p5w dh
Soon there will be 4 (already ordered, waiting for shipping).
raid 0 is VERY fast.
map load times for bf2 for example rely mostly on disk performance.
I'm the first in the game everytime and i run a d820 as cpu at the moment!!!

the performance increase from 2 > 4 isn't as much as from 1 > 2 but this is xtreme systems isn't it? I can't believe i have to explain the performance advantage here.

raid 0 rocks and when 1 disk fails, you loose all data. Be prepared and love the speed.

people posting here raid 0 isn't worth it haven't tried it i think.
I know people running 2 pata drives in raid 0, just to decrease bf2 load times!
yes, look at these HUGE decreases in game loading time :rolleyes:
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2760&p=10
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=10

[[TAG]Imp]

TRIPLE POSTS FTW!
except not.
and about RAID 0, if u wanna roll the dice, go ahead...

[safan80]

That's true, but maybe I don't understand what you were describing in the initial post, please clarify.

basicly it cuts file extraction times ( large RAR files) in half and the defrag times and sped up greatly then if I was using a single drive or two separate drives. it's worth doing if you do a lot of things that are dependant on the speed of the hard drive. raid0 is not meant for anything in which you deem "mission critical".
I reffered to the other RAID thread to show how to boost performance of your raid array is not performing how you want to.
if that didn't help check out http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/single.htm

[Brahmzy]

Ender17 - you called me an "idiot". Thanks bro, real cool on a public forum. I think I hit a nerve and hurt your feelings or something.

Go buy a pair of WD740ADFD's and see for yourself.

By "gaming", I meant load times, by "surfing" I meant loading I.E. and any other surfing activity that accesses the HDDs.

Maybe your just mad at life or can't afford RAID0 - I don't know. I just don't know why so much emotion would come out against a proven technology and other forum members.

I have been building my own systems for over 10 years and have built well over 50 for friends, family and customers, so direct your n00b comment elsewhere. How old are you anyway?

[Ender17]

basicly it cuts file extraction times ( large RAR files) in half and the defrag times and sped up greatly then if I was using a single drive or two separate drives. it's worth doing if you do a lot of things that are dependant on the speed of the hard drive. raid0 is not meant for anything in which you deem "mission critical".
I reffered to the other RAID thread to show how to boost performance of your raid array is not performing how you want to.
if that didn't help check out http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/single.htm
yes it does help with file extraction times, on large RAR files, but you would get the same benefit from using 2 single drives and extracting from drive A to drive B

[Ender17]

Ender17 - you called me an "idiot". Thanks bro, real cool on a public forum. I think I hit a nerve and hurt your feelings or something.

Go buy a pair of WD740ADFD's and see for yourself.

By "gaming", I meant load times, by "surfing" I meant loading I.E. and any other surfing activity that accesses the HDDs.

Maybe your just mad at life or can't afford RAID0 - I don't know. I just don't know why so much emotion would come out against a proven technology and other forum members.

I have been building my own systems for over 10 years and have built well over 50 for friends, family and customers, so direct your n00b comment elsewhere. How old are you anyway?
We have both made personal comments we shouldn't have.
Let's try to keep this on topic from now on.

Back to the game loading times. Both of these reviews show very little time decrease from RAID-0.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2760&p=10
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=10

And it only takes about 1.5 seconds for me to load firefox, so I don't know how you can improve on that.

I'm not against RAID-0, I'm against people claiming it helps in area it doesn't and has been proven repeatedly NOT to help.

[[XC] hipno650]

wow your drive must suck my firefox loads up in about half a second. two seperate drives are more complicated because you are dealing with two drives not one!!!!! and two drives can't touch raid 0. do you even know how raid 0 works? it turns two drives into one basicly thus make reads and writes fast cuz Theoreticly it can read half of the file off one drive and half of the other and write half to one and the other half to the other:stick: were as that is impossible without raid 0:slap: so i don't see how you say the performance of to drives equals raid:confused: and you have never owned raid so you would not know:slapass: i have a friend whos does video editing and with out his raid 0 array he would have to wait forever to compile his work.

Bottom Line is RAID 0 DOES GIVE A PERFORMANCE BOOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Burner27]

I have owned my fair share of drives and have RAIDed them as well from 2 x36GB Raptors all the way up to 74GB Raptors and yes booting is a little faster, and 'some' apps open up faster but you're talking about 1 or 2 seconds faster than a single drive. Once you're in the app, it doesn't make the app faster. If you guys live and die by this mythical 1 or 2 seconds you're saving over a single drive, you guys need to get out more. You can't surf faster with raid, you can't get any more FPS when you're in a game with RAID, and whoopee doo--you startup and shut down a little faster than me, wowee. Lemme just go and what? Blink 2 more extra times than you guys that do have RAID?

How is having 2 drives more complicated than 1 drive? I would be afraid of one of those drives taking a crap and then I would have to RMA it. The I'd have to wait for the whole process to get done, get a replacement drive and then restore the array. If I had 2 separate drives, I could restore to the other drive and still keep going while my drive was being replaced......

[Brahmzy]

Hey, to me, 1-2, 3-4 seconds is worth it. This is xtremesystems dude.

And in some scenerios like file transfers, backups, defragging, it's a lot more than 3-4 seconds you're saving.

Why diss on a proven technology that's faster??

WHO GIVES A CRAP IF IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE? Some people can afford it and want faster disk speed. Some people drop big $$$ just to get a better Pi score and you don't think anything of that.

RAID0 is faster. Period.

Again, go out and buy a pair of WD740ADFD's and RAID0 'em, come back here and tell me you can't tell a difference. If you can't tell a difference, you're high.

[Vassili]

How is having 2 drives more complicated than 1 drive?
Having 2 seperate drive is more complicated because you have to do the "multi-tasking" yourself. And if you have to do things yourself instead of the RAID-controller it slow's things down, I think that is where the feeling "WOW it is faster!!!" comes from.

Back to the game loading times. Both of these reviews show very little time decrease from RAID-0.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2760&p=10
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=10
That are not many games tested. BF1942 and Postal 2 for example gave me the feeling that RAID-0 was indeed faster in loading the level, and was helping to keep the minimum FPS higher, so like this:
Single drive(80GB Maxtor DiamondMax 9 S-ata 8MB cache (on SIL3114(nForce2 PC) and later nForce 4, Win XP)
RAID-0(2x80GB Maxtor DiamondMax 9 S-ata 8MB cache (on SIL3114(nForce2 PC) and later nForce 4, Win XP) (Stripe size 32, cluster 16)

-Example-
Single drive:
Minimum FPS: 20
Average FPS: 70

RAID-0:
Minimum FPS: 40
Average FPS: 70
-Example-

And don't flame Ender17, he is just argumenting your statements that aren't based on any facts! If you don't agree with him please give a more usefull comment then "NO IT IS FASTER IDIOT!". :slapass:

I wonder what you have to say about my comment... :)

[Dr.Frankenstein]

Generally, 32K stripe or less for video editing and data streaming, 64K and above for general desktop applications and games works well.

[Burner27]

Hey, to me, 1-2, 3-4 seconds is worth it. This is xtremesystems dude.

And in some scenerios like file transfers, backups, defragging, it's a lot more than 3-4 seconds you're saving.

Why diss on a proven technology that's faster??

WHO GIVES A CRAP IF IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE? Some people can afford it and want faster disk speed. Some people drop big $$$ just to get a better Pi score and you don't think anything of that.

RAID0 is faster. Period.

Again, go out and buy a pair of WD740ADFD's and RAID0 'em, come back here and tell me you can't tell a difference. If you can't tell a difference, you're high.

I never said i couldn't feel the difference. I just think the expense, the overhead and the risks far outweigh the 1 or 2 seconds you would save. I already stated I OWNED a pair of 36 and 74GB RAPTORS and I wasn't impressed with the overall performance compared to a single drive. I'd much rather have a 500GB HDD than 2 x 74GB raptors in RAID 0.

[Ender17]

I am done with this thread. If you want the facts do some research at storagereview.com
Eugene is the admin over there, search for some of his posts on RAID-0 to learn the truth
There is also a big debate thread that lists a lot of the areas that RAID-0 does help.
If you want to continue being ignorant, fine with me if you waste your money.

Vassili, your numbers are interesting especially since I haven't seen much of anything on BF1942.

[Natalia]

In addition to what Ender said, I ran across these this morning:

http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/gigabyte-iram/index.x?pg=3

I have been searching alot trying to figure out if RAID-0 increased level load times, and several articles I have found this weekend, including the articles Ender posted, show that RAID won't increase loading of games by anything really noticeable. In fact, in the link I provided, the Caviar RAID Edition, which we would assume take advantace of all that could be had from RAID, still provides very little in loading times. Also, what I found very interesting, is that even a Solid State Memory Drive was limited in loading times as well, where you would think it would be absurdly fast.

[Burner27]

I am done with this thread. If you want the facts do some research at storagereview.com
Eugene is the admin over there, search for some of his posts on RAID-0 to learn the truth
There is also a big debate thread that lists a lot of the areas that RAID-0 does help.
If you want to continue being ignorant, fine with me if you waste your money.

Vassili, your numbers are interesting especially since I haven't seen much of anything on BF1942.

I second that motion. Eugene is THE authority on this topic.

[Ender17]

Adding the word "RAID" into the product name is just marketing bs...;)
I'll jump back for just a minute here :)

The WD RAID Edition drives are actually a bit different in that they have TLER (Time Limited Error Recovery), which helps prevent the drive from going into error recovery mode and being dropped by the controller, a problem that was a bit too common with WD drives for a while.

[Vassili]

I'll jump back for just a minute here :)

The WD RAID Edition drives are actually a bit different in that they have TLER (Time Limited Error Recovery), which helps prevent the drive from going into error recovery mode and being dropped by the controller, a problem that was a bit too common with WD drives for a while.
That you actually had to correct me - LOL. Thanks I didn't know that! I guess I was talking bs this time.:rolleyes:

[NapalmV5]

basicly it cuts file extraction times ( large RAR files) in half and the defrag times and sped up greatly then if I was using a single drive or two separate drives. it's worth doing if you do a lot of things that are dependant on the speed of the hard drive. raid0 is not meant for anything in which you deem "mission critical".
I reffered to the other RAID thread to show how to boost performance of your raid array is not performing how you want to.
if that didn't help check out http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/single.htm

you are right about multitasking, u can do more without the hit single hard drive usually takes.. faster extraction, defrags GBs in seconds..

and you were right about the 1GB cache on the areca 1230, so much faster than the 256MB, i cant believe how fast progs install and everything

raid by itself is faster, matched with a fast raid card it gets faster

i wonder wat this beast will do,
http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/9264/1280pg0.jpg

the new areca cards have the 800MHz iop + up to 2GB DDRII cache

[NapalmV5]

I did search and can not find the answer.
-So can I run 3x Raptors in Raid 0 using the Intel ICH7? thanks

3x raptors on the areca raid.. gets me about 240MB/s

[Brahmzy]

Wow! Jealous...

[Adam217]

http://www.overclockers.com/articles1297/

This debate never has a winner, you can find supporting data on both sides of the argument. I have been running RAID0 since Abit started putting RAID controllers on AMD mainboards; KA7 I think; that was with two 10 or 20GB WD HDD's. I've since had my fair share of RAID0 setups, Deathstars 2x30's, 2x40's, WD 2x80JB, 2x120JB and currently WD 2x36 Raptors. I can say with full confidence that RAID0 makes a difference in my day to day enjoyment of my computer.

Installing an OS on a RAID0 array is a great example, it will cut nearly a third or more off the install time, and I am a habitual OS re-installer, 2 months tops. The biggest thing for me is response time, for instance, click on "my computer" and have it open as soon as I release the mouse button, opening Firefox is twice as fast, searching for files is faster. Game load times regardless of what some reviews will have you believe are faster, which in turn makes for a more seamless and uninterrupted game play experience, I like to have my HL2 loads almost non-existent and in BF2 it is a big advantage to being in before anybody else.

There is no comparison when you are dealing with large files, video editing being one of the biggest, it is impossible for you to sustain 100+ MB transfer rates without a RAID setup. What good is the fastest CPU for encoding going to do for you if you can't get the data there fast enough to maximize it's potential. Hard drives are the slowest medium for data in our computers aside from removable storage, why not make it as fast as we can with what is available to us within our personal budgets.

I have to think that "most" of the people that you find at XS are here because we like to get the most out of the hardware we have access to. The difference that a RAID0 setup will make may not be enough to warrant you buying a second drive, but that small investment may make a world of difference in the enjoyment and productivity of the next guy. If you don't notice the benefits of a RAID0 array, more power to you, you have the cost per GB ratio in your favor, but if you are one that can "feel" the difference in having a RAID0 setup, regardless of what a benchmark might say, then it is hard to ever go back. It will be a cold day in hell or a major advancement in storage technology before I ever run a single drive in my main rig ever again.

[lawrywild]

Dude, your making this huge point about RAID 0 not being worth it, can I ask have you ever owned WD Raptor raid hard drives? Well first off, the 36 gigs are MADE to be in a raid set up...they are simply useless by themselves. Do you know what RAID 0 even is?? It's basically making your two hard drives work as one single hard drive. Trust me, it increases performance dramatically. I have never ever ran a benchmark for my harddrives, because personally the second I had these in raid 0 over a year ago, i new i would NEVER go back because the performance to me far outways any risk of loosing data...I back up important things anyway.


:slapass: :slapass:

Well i don't mean for storage of important files etc but your windows apps and games etc. I run 2x200gb and partition 30gb for windows C:\ (22gb free atm) and partition 350gb for games and apps like photoshop, itunes etc then have the extra 20gb for my windows xp professional benching/overclocking. drive. I have a 200gb maxtor for my videos, music and acronis true images.. oh and then my 512mb usb pen drive for my word docs etc

I love it atm..

edit: oh and I partitioned 4gb at the front of my maxtor (fastest access there) for my benching page file :)

[safan80]

Vassili, your numbers are interesting especially since I haven't seen much of anything on BF1942.

if you don't see a boost in speed then it sounds like you don't have the array configured correctly.. Why didn't you use the areca card you brought from me? you never did tell me what other kind of setup you went with.

[Brahmzy]

http://www.overclockers.com/articles1297/

This debate never has a winner, you can find supporting data on both sides of the argument. I have been running RAID0 since Abit started putting RAID controllers on AMD mainboards; KA7 I think; that was with two 10 or 20GB WD HDD's. I've since had my fair share of RAID0 setups, Deathstars 2x30's, 2x40's, WD 2x80JB, 2x120JB and currently WD 2x36 Raptors. I can say with full confidence that RAID0 makes a difference in my day to day enjoyment of my computer.

Installing an OS on a RAID0 array is a great example, it will cut nearly a third or more off the install time, and I am a habitual OS re-installer, 2 months tops. The biggest thing for me is response time, for instance, click on "my computer" and have it open as soon as I release the mouse button, opening Firefox is twice as fast, searching for files is faster. Game load times regardless of what some reviews will have you believe are faster, which in turn makes for a more seamless and uninterrupted game play experience, I like to have my HL2 loads almost non-existent and in BF2 it is a big advantage to being in before anybody else.

There is no comparison when you are dealing with large files, video editing being one of the biggest, it is impossible for you to sustain 100+ MB transfer rates without a RAID setup. What good is the fastest CPU for encoding going to do for you if you can't get the data there fast enough to maximize it's potential. Hard drives are the slowest medium for data in our computers aside from removable storage, why not make it as fast as we can with what is available to us within our personal budgets.

I have to think that "most" of the people that you find at XS are here because we like to get the most out of the hardware we have access to. The difference that a RAID0 setup will make may not be enough to warrant you buying a second drive, but that small investment may make a world of difference in the enjoyment and productivity of the next guy. If you don't notice the benefits of a RAID0 array, more power to you, you have the cost per GB ratio in your favor, but if you are one that can "feel" the difference in having a RAID0 setup, regardless of what a benchmark might say, then it is hard to ever go back. It will be a cold day in hell or a major advancement in storage technology before I ever run a single drive in my main rig ever again.

Excellent post man. QFT!!!

[bing]

Why not try intel matrix raid which slice out the fastest part on highest tranfer rate region with short stroked area from those 3 raptors for the raid 0.

Average seek time will be about 2 to 4ms if you use really narrow front area.

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=467848

[Ender17]

if you don't see a boost in speed then it sounds like you don't have the array configured correctly.. Why didn't you use the areca card you brought from me? you never did tell me what other kind of setup you went with.
I meant I haven't seen very many RAID-0 benchmarks with level loading times (or anything else) for BF1942.
I decided to stick with my BC4852 and put the money towards some extra drives (8 x Seagate 7200.10 320GB).
Since I am just using it for RAID-5 media storage, space is more important to me than speed.

I have a single Raptor WD740ADFD as my boot drive and 2 x Seagate 7200.9 160GB drives for "junk" space to play around with. I will probably put them in RAID-0 using the motherboard controller and run some benchmarks one of these days.

[Ender17]

http://www.overclockers.com/articles1297/
OK OK last comment from me on RAID-0 here.
I knew someone was going to bring this up.

My favorite part of that article is the 164% decrease in Photoshop CS2 load times from a 100% increase in the number of disks :lol:

edit: and the fact the author has an @aol.com e-mail address

[[XC] hipno650]

wow that raid card looks:slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: i personally am pro raid0 :D because i have no need to worry about looseing a drive because i could care less about my data. also drives going bad is very rare with new drives! i might look into that raid monster card!!!:rolleyes:

[fhpchris]

wow that raid card looks:slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: :slobber: i personally am pro raid0 :D because i have no need to worry about looseing a drive because i could care less about my data. also drives going bad is very rare with new drives! i might look into that raid monster card!!!:rolleyes:

I have 940GB of dead hard drives here, all made after 2002 :(

It really sucks when you run 185*4, and a drive dies.

Losing 500gb of data really hurts.

[Ender17]

I have 940GB of dead hard drives here, all made after 2002 :(

It really sucks when you run 185*4, and a drive dies.

Losing 500gb of data really hurts.
RAID is to decrease downtime, it's not a substitute for backups

[Ace-a-Rue]

and you were right about the 1GB cache on the areca 1230, so much faster than the 256MB, i cant believe how fast progs install and everything

raid by itself is faster, matched with a fast raid card it gets faster

i wonder wat this beast will do,
http://img486.imageshack.us/img486/9264/1280pg0.jpg

the new areca cards have the 800MHz iop + up to 2GB DDRII cache

that card is truly meant for large servers...it goes for around $2000

[775911]

RAID is to decrease downtime, it's not a substitute for backups

So is Raid 01 or 10 the best way to get the speed and backup combined.

[Ender17]

So is Raid 01 or 10 the best way to get the speed and backup combined.
RAID is not a backup

[RangerXLT8]

I run 3x 36GB Raptors on my P5W DH in RAID0 on ICH7. I used to run 2, then needed more spacce so I bought another one. It's the fastest HDD setup I've ever used.

And anyone who says that RAID0 Raptors is not going to improve real world performance, has not ever used Raptors in RAID0. I configure PCs with single drives often(i review MBs so I'm constantly installing OS, games ect and benching on my test bench), and game load up on my Raptor setup is atleast 2 times as fast as any single drive I've ever used, in terms of game load up. Raptors in RAID0 are the way to go for enthusiast, unless of course if you can afford SAS\SCSI, but these are not practical, of coure LN2 cooling is not practical but we do it anyway lol.

[dragonhunter]

I run 3x 36GB Raptors on my P5W DH in RAID0 on ICH7. I used to run 2, then needed more spacce so I bought another one. It's the fastest HDD setup I've ever used.


What's stripe size do you use? thanks

[775911]

RAID is not a backup

I didnt mean backup exactly
Wouldnt either of those options allow for a safer setup while still allowing for 0's speed.

I have a cheap EIO raid card and Iam just deciding to use raid 0 or 1 or 01. The data stored will be disposable but it would be inconvenient if the setup was unreliable.

[Ace-a-Rue]

So is Raid 01 or 10 the best way to get the speed and backup combined.

differences....

RAID 10 is often the primary choice for high-load databases, because the lack of parity to calculate gives it faster write speeds.

It is not as robust as RAID 10 and cannot tolerate two simultaneous disk failures...

[safan80]

So is Raid 01 or 10 the best way to get the speed and backup combined.


what you want is raid50 .. two raid5 arrays linked to perform just as fast as raid 0.
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/mult.htm

[safan80]

I meant I haven't seen very many RAID-0 benchmarks with level loading times (or anything else) for BF1942.
I decided to stick with my BC4852 and put the money towards some extra drives (8 x Seagate 7200.10 320GB).
Since I am just using it for RAID-5 media storage, space is more important to me than speed.

I have a single Raptor WD740ADFD as my boot drive and 2 x Seagate 7200.9 160GB drives for "junk" space to play around with. I will probably put them in RAID-0 using the motherboard controller and run some benchmarks one of these days.


that's one of the worst raid controllers out there.
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/test/102/wide/

[Ender17]

that's one of the worst raid controllers out there.
http://tweakers.net/benchdb/test/102/wide/
is there an easy way to narrow that list down to results for 2 disk RAID-0 only?

[Grinch]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98643

[Vassili]

is there an easy way to narrow that list down to results for 2 disk RAID-0 only?
Click on the text "Resultaatfilter & tabelgenerator";)

[safan80]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98643
I already linked to the thead. see page 1