See Topic Title. Which has better read/write performance?
8 replies to this topic
#1
ericgcollyer
-
- Members
-
- 216 posts
Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:La Canada, CA
Posted 27 March 2012 - 01:39 PM
#2
Waco
-
- Reviewer
-
- 14445 posts
Fire means you're doing it right.
- Gender:Male
- Location:Los Alamos, NM
Posted 27 March 2012 - 01:40 PM
RAID 1 by far, especially with small writes.
Booyah.
#3
El_Capitan
-
- Reviewer
-
- 6252 posts
Even the sun goes down
- Gender:Male
- Location:Somerville, MA
Posted 27 March 2012 - 01:46 PM
Depends on what you're wanting them for. I'd always go for RAID 10 or RAID 1 over RAID 5, but that's just me.
My Blog ->> Computer Hardware Upgrades
My Stuff -> For sale | My System Builds
Guides -> Overclocking Phenom II x6 CPU's with PhenomMsrTweaker | Nvidia GPU BIOS voltage unlock and flashing | Overclocking the i5 2500k / i7 2600k | AMD Catalyst Un-install Utility
Other -> The Official Duel Thread | Recommended Cases List | TIM Roundups and Comparison List
#4
bigball1
-
- Members
-
- 551 posts
Geek
- Gender:Male
- Location:Nova Scotia, Canada
Posted 27 March 2012 - 03:09 PM
raid 1 for good read speeds ok write speeds
raid 0 for good read write speeds
raid 5 good read speeds but has poor write speeds
raid 0 for good read write speeds
raid 5 good read speeds but has poor write speeds
Edited by Bigball1, 28 March 2012 - 11:06 AM.
#5
hornybluecow
-
- Reviewer
-
- 4645 posts
I Am The Master Of All The Cows Of This Land
- Gender:Male
- Location:MT
Posted 27 March 2012 - 04:30 PM
i suggest raid 1 unless you are doing work that requires more speed.
raid-1- 1 drive can fail, hence redundant
raid-0 - either drive goes bad and you lose all the data, none recoverable
raid-5 - speed of raid-0 BUT if more than 1 drive goes bad at a time you lose everything
if you limited to only 3 drives i would go with raid-5 for the speed and simi redundancy,
if you can get more (like 4 or more) go with raid-6 (basically raid-0 with redundancy)
otherwise, like i said at the start, if you don't need speed and want to save money, just get 2 drives and go with raid-1.
raid-1- 1 drive can fail, hence redundant
raid-0 - either drive goes bad and you lose all the data, none recoverable
raid-5 - speed of raid-0 BUT if more than 1 drive goes bad at a time you lose everything
if you limited to only 3 drives i would go with raid-5 for the speed and simi redundancy,
if you can get more (like 4 or more) go with raid-6 (basically raid-0 with redundancy)
otherwise, like i said at the start, if you don't need speed and want to save money, just get 2 drives and go with raid-1.
Workstation Build Guide / Socket 2011 Build Log / Let's Create A Game
Main Rig: i7-3930K, Asus P9X79 WS, Quadro FX 4800, Intel 335 SSD, Vertex 4 (Temp Drive), Raid-1 2x 2TB, 64GB (8x8gb) G-skill 1600, SilverStone RAVEN RV02, SeaSonic Plat 1000watt..
Second: No CPU, Asus Rampage IV Gene M, Geforce 570,Seagate 2TB,16GB (2x8gb) Corsair Vengence, OCZ 850w Z.
#6
ericgcollyer
-
- Members
-
- 216 posts
Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:La Canada, CA
Posted 28 March 2012 - 07:26 AM
Thanks for all the replies. I've noticed that I have become somewhat of a leech in the forum, asking a whole lot more questions than I am answering. I will change as of today, you guys are the best.
I'm not sure if RAID 5 actually has improved write speeds. I currently have a RAID 5 array, but seem to get slow write speeds compared to a single drive I have in my system. I was just trying to get some opinions from other system builders. Thanks for all the help you have given me over the past couple of months.
I'm not sure if RAID 5 actually has improved write speeds. I currently have a RAID 5 array, but seem to get slow write speeds compared to a single drive I have in my system. I was just trying to get some opinions from other system builders. Thanks for all the help you have given me over the past couple of months.
#7
Waco
-
- Reviewer
-
- 14445 posts
Fire means you're doing it right.
- Gender:Male
- Location:Los Alamos, NM
Posted 28 March 2012 - 07:57 AM
RAID 1 is preferable in every way over RAID 5 when you have few drives. Unless you're doing 4+ drives in RAID 5 it's pointless. I would also suggest avoiding RAID 5 entirely if your drives are 1 TB or more because of the chances of a rebuild failure.
Booyah.
#8
MercuryDoun
-
- Members
-
- 1492 posts
Banana
- Gender:Male
- Location:South Eastern Michigan, USA
Posted 28 March 2012 - 08:58 AM
both raid 5 and raid 1 have write overhead that slows writes, but they both have quite good read speeds. At least with modern raid controllers.
And dont do raid 6... its not like raid 0 with redundancy... its raid 5 except with two parody drives instead of only one... Its even slower than raid 5 is!
Really the easiest way to decide is, even number of drives(2 or 4) go with RAID1 or 1+0(AKA 10), odd number of drives(3 or 5) go with raid-5.
This isn't knew information, im mostly just repeating what everyone else has already said, but another opinion never hurts!
And dont do raid 6... its not like raid 0 with redundancy... its raid 5 except with two parody drives instead of only one... Its even slower than raid 5 is!
Really the easiest way to decide is, even number of drives(2 or 4) go with RAID1 or 1+0(AKA 10), odd number of drives(3 or 5) go with raid-5.
This isn't knew information, im mostly just repeating what everyone else has already said, but another opinion never hurts!
*My System*
>< Case: Antec DF-85 >< PSU: Antec CP-850 850w >< MoBo: Asus P6X58D-E ><
>< CPU: i7-930, @ 4.0Ghz >< CPU Cooler: Prolimatech Megahalems >< TIM: Artic Silver MTX ><
>< RAM: Mushkin Blackline 6gb DDR3-1600 @ 1914mhz 7-10-7-24 2T ><
>< SSD: Corsair Force F120 120gb >< HDD: 2x Samsung F4 320gb Raid-0 ><
>< GPU: MSI Twin Frozr II GTX570 @ 900/1800/2250 24/7>< Monitor: Asus 24" LCD @ 1920x1080 ><
My gold plated butt-plug business is being sued by Apple. Apparently they have a patent for overpriced crap for a holes.
#9
Waco
-
- Reviewer
-
- 14445 posts
Fire means you're doing it right.
- Gender:Male
- Location:Los Alamos, NM
Posted 28 March 2012 - 09:10 AM
Well RAID 1 writes as fast as a single drive. RAID 5 can write about the same for large files but it's slooooow for small writes.
Booyah.
