RAID vs Raptor? - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Overclocking and Modding
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-29-2005, 02:09 AM   #21 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,487
Default

But the trade-off money and storage wise is not worth it. The performance difference no matter which one is better is very negligible, so it makes more sense to get about the same speed for more storage and less money and noise and heat etc.
__________________

__________________
<font size=\"1\">Intel Pentium 4 3.4GHZ HT-------------------AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Winchester
Intel Stock CPU Cooler------------------------Zalman 7700-Cu
Idle: 51C---------------------------------------Idle: 21C
Load: 72C--------------------------------------Load: 28C
ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe-----------------------GIGABYTE K8NF4-9 NForce4 4X
512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200-----512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200
ATI RADEON X800 XT Platinum Edition-------ATI RADEON X800 XL
Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS----------Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Western Digital Raptor 37GB 10K------------2X Western Digital SATA150 Caviar SE 80GB RAID 0
Antec True 480W------------------------------Thermaltake Silent PurePower 680W
Zalman 5.1 Headphones----------------------Zalman 5.1 Headphones
Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone----------Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone
Microsoft Multimedia Keyboard 1.0A----------Logitech Media Keyboard
Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 4.0A---------Logitech MX510
3DMark05: 5,928------------------------------3DMark05: 5,000</font>
dale5605 is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 02:26 AM   #22 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Chankama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,523
Default

Even though the Raptor may be faster, "personally", I would only consider 7200 rpm HDD at the moment. I agree that the price/performance ratio is not justified. Some people use dual combinations with Raptors for the OS disk and a large 7200 rpm for storage. But, u know, I can wait an extra 10 seconds while my computer starts. How u look at game load times is another issue however.

If u want the fastest possible, the Raptor is the way to go .. Otherwise, the 7200 rpm is great too in its own way.
__________________

Chankama is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 04:20 AM   #23 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 354
Default

k thanx a lot guys.. yeh i'll hav a think about wat the best option for 'me' is and if the performance/price is justified
BlkShdw88 is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 12:17 PM   #24 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,363
Default

AHH DALE!!!
__________________

Quote:
Ricer: from the latin word Ricarius meaning to suck at everything you attempt.
desiboi is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 01:03 PM   #25 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

I've dealt with a number of hard drive configurations, and I will tell you now, if hard drive space is not an issue, the Raptor is the faster overall solution, unless of course you're looking to throw in three or four drives in a RAID 0 which of course increases the risk of failure even moreso.

Now, in theory the two 7200RPM drives in a RAID 0 should cut their access times in half, which should drop them down to about 4ms or so, the same as a single Raptor, but this simply isn't the case in all situations.

The only time you might see a RAID 0 array performing around the same speed as a Raptor is the write process, most intergrated RAID controllers do not support read stripping therefore game load times etc. wouldn't be decreased noticably with a RAID 0.

To summarize, storage size you want the RAID 0. Speed you're looking at the Raptor.
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 01:06 PM   #26 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,487
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by gaara
I've dealt with a number of hard drive configurations, and I will tell you now, if hard drive space is not an issue, the Raptor is the faster overall solution, unless of course you're looking to throw in three or four drives in a RAID 0 which of course increases the risk of failure even moreso.

Now, in theory the two 7200RPM drives in a RAID 0 should cut their access times in half, which should drop them down to about 4ms or so, the same as a single Raptor, but this simply isn't the case in all situations.

The only time you might see a RAID 0 array performing around the same speed as a Raptor is the write process, most intergrated RAID controllers do not support read stripping therefore game load times etc. wouldn't be decreased noticably with a RAID 0.

To summarize, storage size you want the RAID 0. Speed you're looking at the Raptor.
I consider cost, heat, noise, and other variables as well.
My raptor idles at 37C while the 80gb's are around 25C.
Also like I said it's very loud compared to the 80gb's which I never even hear no matter what I'm doing. And 2 80gb's is cheaper than a 37gb raptor and probably faster, perhaps the 74gb is faster than the 2 80's but you could get 4 80gb's for that price.
__________________
<font size=\"1\">Intel Pentium 4 3.4GHZ HT-------------------AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Winchester
Intel Stock CPU Cooler------------------------Zalman 7700-Cu
Idle: 51C---------------------------------------Idle: 21C
Load: 72C--------------------------------------Load: 28C
ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe-----------------------GIGABYTE K8NF4-9 NForce4 4X
512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200-----512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200
ATI RADEON X800 XT Platinum Edition-------ATI RADEON X800 XL
Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS----------Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Western Digital Raptor 37GB 10K------------2X Western Digital SATA150 Caviar SE 80GB RAID 0
Antec True 480W------------------------------Thermaltake Silent PurePower 680W
Zalman 5.1 Headphones----------------------Zalman 5.1 Headphones
Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone----------Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone
Microsoft Multimedia Keyboard 1.0A----------Logitech Media Keyboard
Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 4.0A---------Logitech MX510
3DMark05: 5,928------------------------------3DMark05: 5,000</font>
dale5605 is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 01:35 PM   #27 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

As a specifically stated if you're looing for space, go with the RAID 0, if you don't need 160GB of storage space and have money burning a hole in your pocket there's no reason not to get the Raptor for added speed. I will repeat myself, the speed/storage price ratio for each of two combinations balances themselves out. You just have to decide which one you wanna put your money into.

As far as noise goes, I honestly couldn't care less, maybe you do, I really don't know. With proper vibration control and a good air cooling solution you shouldn't be able to hear it. As far as temperature goes, a safe operating temperature for any hard drive is in the 40s, I don't particularily see that as an argument.
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 02:49 PM   #28 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,088
Default

Temperature is not a issue here..Just becasue the Raptor runs slightly warmer, does not make this any kind of liability. Nor does this effect performance. Noise level is the same... Raptors are not very loud at all. If you have some type of custom cooling system. Such as a after market heatsink/cpu fan, along with a few fans. You wont be able to hear anything from your HDD. Not even a SCSI drive.. People would like to think running normal drives on raid0 can out-beat 10000rpm drives, but this is not true. Gaara's first statement along with the link he posted, ended the debate. Raid0 is a great division for data, but its limited. Raid0 gets its SPEED from the drive. The way it handles data is ideal, but its limited by speed. Then Dale comes in, and starts adding all these so called bad assets that come with 10000rpm drives. Like heat and noise. But none of them are elaborate enough to produce any sort of consequence.... Money is the only problem, but let it be known Raptors are not normal drives. So they shouldent be considered as one. So dont be surprised by the cost, these are top-line performance drives. Its like comparing the performance efficiency and price of a FX-55 to a 3500.
__________________
Finished With TF.
Codeine is offline  
Old 05-29-2005, 03:16 PM   #29 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Chankama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,523
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by gaara
Now, in theory the two 7200RPM drives in a RAID 0 should cut their access times in half, which should drop them down to about 4ms or so,
Not true man. Even in theory, you have to model "typical computer use" to the best of your ability. In which case, the access time cannot possible be cut in half - even in the theoritical sense. If a model says that the performance increase should be 2x, it just means that its a poor model.

As your model gets more and more elaborate, the estimate will start to resemble benchmarks more and more.. The fact that the "2x" performance is usually not realized in benchmarks clearly should indicate that there is a huge flaw in the model that is typically used - in this case assuming that for all time accesses are perfectly divided between the 2 drives.. A "better" model would be realizing that when a new request comes in to HDD1, there is a 25% chance that HDD1 is busy from another request, while HDD2 is free, etc. etc.

This is "still" a vast simplication and is still a very poor model. But better that the original one I would think... I would presume that the original model is only valid when you read/write a large file and do nothing else.. A "perfect" model would be able to incorporate all these cases and different types of accesses, and then also incorporate a probabilistic model for each type of access in order to estimate the "performance increase".. But, this is complicated and would differ from user to user.. However, we can still easily construct a better model than the original that gives "2x".
Chankama is offline  
Old 05-30-2005, 03:21 AM   #30 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 354
Default

yeh noise is not really a problem (for me).. and yes i suppose it is like comparing as top of line cpu to mid range for price/performance ratio.. hmm still tough decision to make i think, i want to have super quick o/s loading time and application loading time, i dont really care that much about copying large files like movies, as long as its quicker than normal.. but another question... RAID 0 makes windows load slower does it not? because it has to load more drivers.. i know RAID has own bios but i just would like to have extremely fast boot times for windows and applications etc.. i think most reviews/benchmarks are showing raptor to be faster in this area and RAID (any) to be just trailing behind
__________________

BlkShdw88 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.