4 7200 drive in raid0 - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-14-2005, 02:50 PM   #11 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,932
Default

RAID 0 spreads the data evenly across all drives. It doesn't use them like a stack. If one drive goes down on a RAID-0 system, all the drives become useless and all the data is lost. You will have to reformat them and start over.
__________________

__________________

-----------------------------------------------
Don\'t hate the player...Hate the game...
ShoobieRat is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 02:56 PM   #12 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Chankama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,523
Default

Yup. Also, think of it this way. If you take your one single hard drive, and delete all the data in every other accessible memory location, the whole drive would become useless. Sure you'd have 1/2 the data, but out of context, it's meaningless.
__________________

Chankama is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 06:10 PM   #13 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
aj2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,094
Default

yea i understand about risks about it. thanks alot for you input guys.

what would you class as a good controller? would the nvidia or silicon image raid controllers on my motherboard be classes as "decent"
__________________
AMD x2 5000+ black edition at 3.3GHZ zalman cnps 9700-NT
Gigabyte GA-M57SLI-S4 motherboard
3072mb: OCZ ddr800 gold
2x 7800GTX in SLI for 20" viewsonic
OCZ 600watt power supply
www.angelic-accessories.co.uk - plug for my gfs site
aj2003 is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:54 PM   #14 (permalink)
Him
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via AIM to Him Send a message via Yahoo to Him
Default

I think any controller other than a generic one would be classified as decent.

As for the performance goes, since it does have to write the same amount of data to both drives, it would decrease performance because the process of the data being written has to be done twice.

If RAID 0 is hardly ever advisable, why was it invented? I mean, if you think about it, it really dosent serve any purpose at all. Well, actually, come ot think of it, it does make sense for two drives to act as one. It would make some things easier. Well, I guess i answered my own question on that one. I got RAID 0+1 setup, which offers a good deal of fault tolerance. I want to setup raid 5 though. That would be tight.
Him is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:56 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,433
Default

RAID 0 is kinda pointless as far as im concerned. if u want redundancy, go for RAID 1. the data gets stored in both drives that way. in RAID 0, it just gets split in half.
__________________





-AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Winchestor
-MSI K8N Neo4-F
-Sapphire Radeon X850 XT
-2x 1024 Corsair XMS Pro

<form action=\"http://www.srsyo.org/tfsearch.php\" method=\"get\">
<input type=\"text\" name=\"search\"><input type=\"submit\" name=\"submit\" value="Search!"></form> Search TF before you post!
dhw200 is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:58 PM   #16 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Chankama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,523
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Him

As for the performance goes, since it does have to write the same amount of data to both drives, it would decrease performance because the process of the data being written has to be done twice.

If RAID 0 is hardly ever advisable, why was it invented?
You are confusing Raid 0 with Raid 1. Raid 0 does NOT write the same data twice. In fact it provides no redundancy at all. It writes some data on drive1 and writes some other data of the big logical drive on drive2. So it should be faster during writes AND reads IMO. b/c both HDDs can equally take part of the IO operations. And what is the bottleneck usually? The HDD access. Well now we have 2.

Raid 1 requires info to be written twice. Writes are slower (write twice). But reads should be faster (2 places to get it from). All depends on how the controller works I guess.
Chankama is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 09:02 PM   #17 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
aj2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,094
Default

@him, thats not how raid0 works. it gets say 1mb had to be saved. In therory it would be split between the drives (say 4) so that each drive wrote their share, in this case 0.25mb which is obviously faster to write than 1mb. this should make transfer times 4x the speed for 4 disks 3 times for 3 and 2times for 2. BUT it doesnt work like that, as with dual cpus, sli or dual channel the increase in speed is only a small proportion of that.

my transfer rate increased from 70mb/s to 92mb/s by changingfrom one hard drive to two in raid0. Its for that reason raid0 is used.

Wat my original question was wat kind of transfer speed would i get with 4 drives in raid0 instead of my 2? and how would this effect loading windows and games etc?
__________________
AMD x2 5000+ black edition at 3.3GHZ zalman cnps 9700-NT
Gigabyte GA-M57SLI-S4 motherboard
3072mb: OCZ ddr800 gold
2x 7800GTX in SLI for 20" viewsonic
OCZ 600watt power supply
www.angelic-accessories.co.uk - plug for my gfs site
aj2003 is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 09:16 PM   #18 (permalink)
Him
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via AIM to Him Send a message via Yahoo to Him
Default

HAHA! Yeah, we never even answered your original questions. I honestly couldnt tell you about performance increases or decreases.

I dont know about you, but I always get RAID 0 and 1 mixed up right now. And while typing my last post, I did answer my own question so I guess that post can be ignored.
Him is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 10:50 PM   #19 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,487
Default

RAID 0 decreases performance? WTF?!?

I got 2 hard drives running RAID 0 and they are faster than my 10,000 rpm drive. They would INCREASE performance shoobie, you need to learn what you are talking about.

On my RAID setup spyware scans go super-fast, things install lightning quick. Basically any reading/writing operations from the hard drives get's FASTER, yes FASTER, not slower.

I've never had a hard drive fail, you shouldn't worry about that imho.
__________________
<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 04-14-2005, 10:56 PM   #20 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

The increase gained in RAID 0 is not really very substancial. It is faster, I have experience with it and I will give credit, but when you factor in the speed difference, along with the price as well as reliability, the cons start to outweigh the pros.

You would be better off just simply increasing rotation or cache size, RAID was built more for reliability than for speed.

Shoobie - Although I agree with what you're basically trying to say, I don't see how RAID 0 decreases speed performance. It will almost always result in speed increase, it's difficult for me to judge since I have two 10K drives in a RAID 0 to start, but I'm almost certain they have an edge over a single 10K drive.
__________________

__________________
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  
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 Off
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 07:04 PM.


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