RAID vs Raptor?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My RAID array loads windows after 3.5 or 4 passes of the loading bar, while my raptor takes 8 or 9 passes before loading up.
 
not to hav a go at u or nethin dale5605 but the amount of bars passing dont mean jack.. u could hav stufd around wit windows or sumthin.. i hav a p3 700 wit 40gb 2mb cache at moment and iv got it down to 1 bar passing (manual tweaks)
 
I have 2 74gb raptors in RAID 0 config, they get very hot so i use a cooler master cooldrive 6 to monitor temperature. Im shortly purchasing a 7200rpm large drive for storage purposes. Obviously my rig is very fast but i cant always justify the price i paid for what i have. For speed the raptors win hands down.
 
bing64...which one is faster for windows startup and app loading? RAID 0 or just single raptor? I no transfers would b faster hands down on RAID 0 rite?
 
how does a Raid 0 reduce access times?
I mean, access time is the time it takes for a drive to find data. this means moving the read/write hears and waiting for the platter to spin around for the 'right' data to come around.
if anything, I would think the access times would be greater, since both drives will have to do this.
 
bing64...which one is faster for windows startup and app loading? RAID 0 or just single raptor? I no transfers would b faster hands down on RAID 0 rite?
The RAID 0 array would be the faster solution, although it'd only be about 5% of a performance increase over the single drive so it's not particularily worth it.

As I've said, unless you invest in a PCI RAID controller, chances are you aren't gonna have read stripping, meaning that the overall load times or data access won't see more than a 5% performance increase with a RAID 0.

The single Raptor will yield faster performance than the 7200RPM RAID array.
 
Excuse the language but wtf?
How can you have write stiping and not read striping? From what I understand about RAID the data is split across the drives in consecutive strips. So if the data is broken up between the drives how can the two drives not both read it? Since it's broken up they each have to read their part of the data for the data to come up whole. In a RAID array data is read and written by drives in parallel.

I would appreciate a link backing up what you are saying.
 
gaara said:
chances are you aren't gonna have read stripping

hmmmm.. yeah Gaara. What did you mean by this?.. While I haven't looked at all the RAID controllers on the market that "come" with the popular motherboards, this seems to be somewhat impossible. If you write something in one format, you have to read it back also. As in, the "read part" of the controller has to understand the concept of striping.. Otherwise, when it looks at the 2 HDDs when told to read something, it'll be like "huh???"..

Perhaps, by your statement you meant that in "some controllers" the reads from the 2 HDDs cannot "occur at the same time"? Obviously, the controller MUST understand what a striped disk is for it to read anything. But, if it doesn't take advantage of the fact that reads can be done from 2 drives simultaneously, then that's just a deficiency of the controller.. If it is the case, then its a stupid deficiency, as implementing such simultanous reads is quite easy. NCQ does something similar with its queing of HDD reads. With that being maintream, I find it somewhat difficult to believe that similar functionality wouldn't be on maintream motherboads RAID controller - the ability to rearrange read requests and to have 2 simultanous inputs. You just need some buffer space.

But again, I don't know what all the products on the market do, and there are some stupid companies out there that doesn't do basic things right. And if true, this is one of em.. :-\
 
Of course a RAID controller has the ability to extract and use the data if it's able to write it in strips the hard drives, all I'm suggesting is that most RAID controllers don't come equipped with the ability to instruct the hard drives in said array how to efficently extract the data simutaneously.

This is what I have been saying all along with a RAID 0 array being nothing but a theory, it's not a true RAID array and was for the most part a server idea that was modified and migrated to the end user. The RAID controller built onto desktop motherboards doesn't fully support STR both ways, it's only been optimized for writing to the platters, and even then, it's not a true full speed STR.

It's difficult to explain, we discussed it briefly in my engineering class
 
So your teacher told you this?.. I guess I interpreted u correctly in your previous post.

As I said in my previous post, it should be trivial to implement such functionality to do simultanous reads. Just need some buffering and the interface is obviously there. It's not really anything complicated.

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=caviarre&page=7

These guys seem to indicate the read speed is vastly superior with RAID 0. The test bench is an intel system and they seem to be using the integrated solution as I didn't see any mention of a separate PCI card.

And this is for an AMD system:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1746&page=3

Same thing. Read with RAID 0 is faster.. Should have another conversation with your teacher man :p..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom