Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Angry_Games

hard drives & raid - benchmark and compare!

Recommended Posts

Since adding two more 250gb drives in RAID 0 I really don't see (or feel) much difference from running two of these in RAID 0...I'm thinking the smart thing would be to run 0+1...in doing so would it be best to hook up a PATA drive temporarily, format the drives and also create a smaller partition, say 20 to 40 gigs for OS and programs? Utilize the remainder for storage?

 

250gb is plenty for me (A terabyte gone to waste I know, but not really needed). I just want this particular rig to be as fast as it can be...

 

Any tips from the storage gods????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2-3 Hitachi 80Gb sata II

 

they seems to be the best HDD for raid performance, if you dont have the $ for raptors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i posted elsewhere, then found this thread.

 

compare my single raptor to my regular sata in RAID 0

 

Single raptor

 

74gb.jpg

 

Dual WD 320Gb in RAID 0 using Silicon Image controller:

 

raid0.jpg

 

Dual WD 320Gb in RAID 0 using Nvidia Nforce controller:

 

raid02.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any two Satas in RAID0 will beat a single Raptor. 2 Raptors in RAID0 isn't much faster than standard satas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any two Satas in RAID0 will beat a single Raptor. 2 Raptors in RAID0 isn't much faster than standard satas.

 

So, which one would you personally choose between the choices above. some people always stick with the better access time of the raptor. But the transfer rates are so much better on the RAID setup.. I would think that might help in loading games and things like that, since I only have 1GB of ram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Raptor = 2 SATA2 RAID-0

2 Raptor RAID-0 = 4 SATA2 RAID-0

 

 

in my opinion at least... size and price make SATA2 better than Raptors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any two Satas in RAID0 will beat a single Raptor. 2 Raptors in RAID0 isn't much faster than standard satas.

do you mean "2 raptors in RAID0 isn't much faster than 2 standard satas in RAID-0" ? or that 2 Raptors in RAID-0 isn't faster than any one sata drive ? If the latter, the statement is faulty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
do you mean "2 raptors in RAID0 isn't much faster than 2 standard satas in RAID-0" ? or that 2 Raptors in RAID-0 isn't faster than any one sata drive ? If the latter, the statement is faulty

For the record. Two Raptor drives in RAID-0 are faster than any two 7200RPM drives.

 

The statement was "2 Raptors in RAID0 isn't much faster than standard satas." which is absolutely true.

 

While you can use synthetic benchmarks to prove the Raptor array is faster and you can measure the difference in load times with real applications, the reality is that a Raptor array is not much faster than an array of 7200RPM drives.

 

Spending the extra money to get an array that's a few percentage points faster becomes a question of value. This is where many people start to question the value of having Raptors.

 

If money is no object and having the very fastest array is your ultimate goal, Raptors are the only game in town.

 

If you don't mind being behind the Raptors by a few percentage points but save half the money, get some Seagate 7200.10 drives which are the new performance leader or the Hitachi 80GB SATA 3Gbps drives which have the best bang for your bucks.

 

All of these statements are proven in this thread. Take the time to compare the results provided by countless forum members.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You make it sound that there is no difference.

Well, it would be different if I had said there was no difference but I didn't.

 

Doubling the cost for even a 10% gain is significant while increasing from 130MBsec to 143MBsec isn't that great of a difference in "real world" performance.

 

Once you get to a certain level, increases become limited by the rest of the bandwidth chain.

 

That's why despite huge benchmark scores, early RAID-0 arrays added little to "real world" performance until CPU and memory performance caught up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...