raid 0 10k raptors

Yes, for most things. Nothing will run slower, but some things will run faster. In raid 0 there are two harddrive to write the data to instead of one, this gets rid of that bottleneck.

OMFG you morons...

I am tired of this argument.

Pray tell me, what bottleneck?! And what, in Raid 1 there is fewer than 2 harddrives? What is the meaning of the sentence in Raid 0 there is two harddrive to write to, then? How about Raid 5? There are at least 3 then, is it even faster than Raid 0, by your logic?

Ignorance is contagious.

To the original poster - the answer is it depends on your use. But if you're planning to RAID Raptors for a home PC, you're probably somebody with too much money to burn without actually knowing what you're getting into.

Here, read this at your leisure. It's old, but still true.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=1

A little harsh...but...thank god someone said it.

As has been beaten to death in the appropriate thread, Tom's article is anything but comprehensive. All it does is show peak performance. Theoretical peak performance. The value of that to the average user is precisely 0.

I do not think, all things equal, RAID 5 is faster than 0. Parity takes overhead over striping. Of course, the comparison is difficult because no one in the right mind would take 0 over 5 if they have a controller that can handle 5 in an efficient manner. And I imagine controllers optimized to run 5 are not really optimized to run 0. (although who knows what latter means. And I'm guessing here). I was simply referring to your point about multiple drives, which is not what makes 0 faster - it is the way the drives are used. Heck, 1+0 or 10 requires at least four drives but is but it is in no way faster than 0 with 2.

The point is, even if you understand all these issues, it did not come through in your post. In fact, you just confused a person seeking advice into thinking that spending some $250 (for the sake of the conversation) or $1.70 per Gb is going to give him screamer of a system. Which is a fallacy. Like someone pointed out, that money may be better spent elsewhere. Now, if he's doing tasks that require fast sequential transfers, all the power to him, go RAID0 (hopefully with back up, and not for the system partition, etc.). Something makes me doubt that, though...

You may want to consider Hitachi's new line of Deskstars. 1TB for only $399, and the performance in phenomenal, they're very close to the Raptor 150 in real-world and application performance.

thank you and thats what im going to get. im glad i got a straight answer from someone without all the confusing stuff

ok in a nutshell which will give faster performance raid 0 150gb 10k western digitals or 1tb hitachi. im not looking for which is the better for the money im wondering which is the best for performance. im looking to spend around $4000-5000 on this system. also i was planning on putting in a 750gb storage drive anyway.

Good, I'm tired of dealing with all the raid vs speed thingies, I think you should just go for the massive 1tb drive for its storage and speed, it's not on the market just yet, but it's in systems and will come to shops in a few weeks

I don't know about that, in terms of latency and write speeds, the scsi drives win everytime and are most stable than raptors in raid 0, I would have to say that's a bad example

8O Man, do you know what the op could do with $300 friggin dollars!!!!!!!!!

Dewd, the op could get 4 raptors and run them in raid 0+1, for speed and stability, or get a massive 1tb drive and 2 raptors in raid 0 for the ultimate speed, space, and stability/backup 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O 8O

I'm not trying to flam here, but good raid cards cost a crap load of money, I'd sacrifice a bit of performance for onboard, I mean the raid cards onboard the newer 590sli and 680i chipsets are quite good imo, I haven't actually tried the onboard on my crosshair yet, but from what I hear it's actually quite good :?

I don't know about 100%, but they will increase raid benefits, but still, for the price of one raid controller (a good one btw, there are cheap ones), you could get two 150gig raptors in raid0 and that would pwn when combined with a tb drive for backup and all other stuff beyond games, if you wanted, you could install the OS on the raid 0 raptors, but for stability's sake, I would say OS on the tb drive, which would kinda defeat the purpose of the raptors, but still, you never know, you coud back up everything on the tb drive for peace of mind and have ultimate performance, but as you said, to really see a benefit, you'd need a raid controller that's actually designed by a company that specificaly makes raid controller, instead of a list second add on by nvidia/intel/amd/ati

Free, I wish, intel and nvidia charge you for every dime they spend, and then get a nickel out of it 8O lol man, nothing is free these days, but onboard is certainly cheaper than a top notch controller

man, people these days, they just don't understand the concept of giving. So I think out of fairness, at christmas time, newegg should give me a two agena fx cpus, a top end 4x4 board (yeah, I know, it's 4x4, but when it's free, the more cpus the merrier ), 4gigs of their top 1150 ocz flexXTC memory, 4 150gig raptors, the 1tb drive I was speaking of, a raid controller, an antec p190 case, an acer 24" monitor with hdcp, sli 8900gtxs (yeah, I prefer the r600 too, but sli has proven to give a better increase than crossfire), a $500 gift certificate for frozencpu, a top notch x-fi sound card, a 5.1 logitech z speaker system, a logitech g15 for a the ultimate gaming keyboard, and finally a logitech g7 mouse too , I think that would keep me happy for the next decade (or more realisticly next month )

No joke, I want newegg to give me that

They do, but their sweepstakes are impossible to win

in that case, here's some random thing my latin teacher showed me that you are more likely to solve, transilate this into common english
m r dux
a r not!!
cmwangs?
Y I B!! m r dux!

if you solve it, you get a taco 8)

them are ducks.
they are not!
see them wings?
why, I be!! Them are ducks!
I get a taco! Make it trimmed up nicely...unless that's not the kind of taco you be talkin' about.

P.S.-RAID 0 is a groovy experiment for desktops, but not really worth the effort, expense, and security problems, unless you backup alot, at which point if you're spending 5% of your time doing backups, there goes your speed advantage.

Hmm. I must be high then, because I have read I believe 2 articles on the fight between sas, sci, & sata, with sas 'theoretically' creaming both of them, but also showing a slight lead to sata 2.5 over u320. I am sorry but Idid not bookmark it, nor do I recall what controllers or drives were used, other that there was an lsi &adaptec sas controller being tested for the sas, and that the raptor 10k was one of the sata tested. Granted, I could have misread. Or the review could have been bunk.

lol

As to whether or not Raid 0 makes any difference... well, I would say it does make a difference. Like I stated earlier, the average difference that I see is only at max 25% faster. IMO, it does make a difference loading a game. It does make a difference transferring files. Pretty much anything and everything disk related, I have found Raid 0 to be faster... depending.

Being your average everyday geek, I wanted to find out. Ah, but you are already saying "yeah, whatever. and just how do you know?"

lol. that is what I said too until I investigated.

Without all the droll details, I wanted to know does Raid 0 improve performance? And how to tweak it.

I took 2 sata drives, installed XP on them @ stripe sizes of 8,16,32 & 64, and each of those stripe sizes was installed with cluster sizes of 4,8,16,32 & 64. That makes for a lot of install lol.

Then I proceeded after each install to run a series of tests, in the exact same order int he exact same method, starting on stripe 8 cluster 4, working my way up the clusters until 64, then back to stripe 16 cluster 4.

And what I found to be true is that

A. drivers affect performance
B. cluster to stripe size affect performance
C. performance is indeed greater that either single SATA or ATA hdd.
E. performance is measurable in many different ways, but is measurable
F. that all of this testing can be recorded and show that while Raid 0 can be considered 'faster' than not Raid 0 (being whatever it is, say a single ATA hdd), that it is not particuarily that MUCH faster.

But mostly, those of us who do not 'know' much, can seem to 'feel' the difference. Maybe that is our imagination. As for me, whether my methodology of testing is 'crap' or not, I use the Raid.

And, because there have been a lot of good points here from you who seem to know what you are talking about, the number one thing on my list for tommorrow is to check out that Hitachi 1tb drive. Sounds interesting.

later.

yeah, it made sense after he solved it (had never taken any foreign languages really, aside from a bit of german, but even then, lol), so i really wasnt sure at all what it could be, aside from just guessing

yes. need to be learnt how to correctly speak that bad southern properly

lol, yeah

well, the OP hopefully has the answer he was looking for

ok, cool

I have two 74 gb raptors in raid 0 on a core 2 build and love the payoff in performance. I do some video work and some gaming. I see a real life, every day difference.

Let me point out something that most anti-raid0 envangelist posters leave out ... working with video on your pc will be more common in the future. I just encode TIVO and dvd files to divx/xvid for archival and future home theater purposes right now, which if you don't do yet ... you will. Video capture for home movies or editing and sharing the digital cam files, HD video capture ... there is likely a lot of video work in your pc's future even if its 'just a gamer' now. Just imagine the need for encoding once the world goes HD and the home terabyte is already crowded. How did you think all that stuff gets on youtube? Yeah, that's not the future knocking on your door ... honest.

So if you have the money to burn and are going for bleeding edge, do it. The Hitachi isn't going to give you the 7-8ms access times and bandwidth of raptors in raid0 period. Price per gb is meaningless if price isn't a consideration. Leave the storage to the storage drives and the performance to the performance drives. I have a disk image of the OS so who cares if one dies I mean I seriously don't get how that is a negative. Treat your raid0 as a system drive, take the occasional image, and you'll be gtg.

do you mean stability as in some apps might mess up sometimes or you mean one of the hd's actually dying or something?

ya but realisticly how often does it actually happen or you taking about like 3+ years down the road or something that can happen even when you buy it or what we looking at or is this just a chance that this could happen? in other words what he is talking about is it blown out of poportion or something to seriously worry about?