Should I Go RAID-0? - Page 3

JCLW · October 15th, 2006

It depends entirely on your usage, how valuable your data is, if you have other data storage, and of course how much money you have.

And, as someone has already pointed out, what controller you use.

I tried two Raptor 74G drives in RAID 0, and liked them so much I added another two (on an ICH7R). But I have a seperate file server with a RAID 5 array so if my RAID 0 array were to go down this second I'd only lose about 6 hours of work (plus this post).

In my experience NCQ, like RAID 0, only really provides noticeable speed improvements when you are multitasking.

A good option, if you're running a recent intel southbridge (ICH6R or higher), is to try "Matrix" RAID. It basically allows you to create both RAID 0 and RAID 1 "partitions" on the same drive. So with two 300GB drives you could use 50GB from each to create a RAID 0 array (100GB total) for OS & apps, and the remaining 250GB on each to create a RAID 1 array (250GB total) to hold your data.

My four Raptors are all stacked one on top of each other and the top one only gets up to ~50C.

**gvblake22** · October 15th, 2006

Welcome back JCLW!!

And that is a very interesting idea with the Matrix RAID. I never knew you could do that. I have never gotten into the RAID scene myself, but it looks more and more tempting everytime I revisit the idea.

JCLW · October 16th, 2006

Thanks,

Here's the intel page about it: http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets...storage_sb.htm

jph1589 · October 16th, 2006

Well I tried it both ways since I had the resources and time. From purely a hands on perspective, I'll keep the raid setup. Whether the performance boost is imaginary or not, perception is what really matters. Last week when I was writing the Media PC review, there were some times when I had quite a few things going at once and that is becoming pretty common on this system. So I guess maybe I don't really qualify as the average desktop user and maybe that is why my perception is that it makes a big difference.

It was quite a nice bonus to find out that my new version of the VideoRedo program is multithreaded also. Between that and the Raid-0, those processes all have been reduced in length quite noticably.

I posted the HD-Tach comparisons in my other thread about this build and it is really hard to look at them and imagine that things would't be faster..... a lot faster. The numbers were so drastically different that it is pretty hard to just write them off as a fluke. But then my understanding of how those speeds affect real life things stops with being able to observe and time processes that I usually perform. By doing that, I am convinced that Raid 0 is worth the trouble for me.

That being said, it certainly isn't for the faint of heart. Having to hook up 20 year old technology (f....drive) and create a driver disk, only to have the windows install tell you that "MS windows XP already has that driver, are you sure you want to use this one?" So then why was it I had to do that floppy thing? I can't help but think it was simply to discourage me from using Raid. That is just my opinion on a grumpy monday morning though :>

**Capper** · October 16th, 2006

Quote:

A good option, if you're running a recent intel southbridge (ICH6R or higher), is to try "Matrix" RAID. It basically allows you to create both RAID 0 and RAID 1 "partitions" on the same drive. So with two 300GB drives you could use 50GB from each to create a RAID 0 array (100GB total) for OS & apps, and the remaining 250GB on each to create a RAID 1 array (250GB total) to hold your data.

I smell another guide

jph1589 · October 16th, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capper

I smell another guide

That is a really compelling topic. I agree! I would really enjoy learning about that from someone who had done it.

**Capper** · October 16th, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jph1589

That is a really compelling topic. I agree! I would really enjoy learning about that from someone who had done it.

No, I was hinting that would be another good guide from you!!!!!

jph1589 · October 16th, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capper

No, I was hinting that would be another good guide from you!!!!!

Yes I know......and I was ducking appropriately. I am not worthy for that one.

**Hitman** · October 19th, 2006

Where did my RAID guide go?

**gvblake22** · October 19th, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hitman

Where did my RAID guide go?

I don't remember a RAID guide......:suspicious:

October 15th, 2006	#21
JCLW Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Toronto, at the moment Posts: 124	It depends entirely on your usage, how valuable your data is, if you have other data storage, and of course how much money you have. And, as someone has already pointed out, what controller you use. I tried two Raptor 74G drives in RAID 0, and liked them so much I added another two (on an ICH7R). But I have a seperate file server with a RAID 5 array so if my RAID 0 array were to go down this second I'd only lose about 6 hours of work (plus this post). In my experience NCQ, like RAID 0, only really provides noticeable speed improvements when you are multitasking. A good option, if you're running a recent intel southbridge (ICH6R or higher), is to try "Matrix" RAID. It basically allows you to create both RAID 0 and RAID 1 "partitions" on the same drive. So with two 300GB drives you could use 50GB from each to create a RAID 0 array (100GB total) for OS & apps, and the remaining 250GB on each to create a RAID 1 array (250GB total) to hold your data. My four Raptors are all stacked one on top of each other and the top one only gets up to ~50C. Workstation: P5WD2-P \| 945D \| 2x 1GB \| X1950Pro XF \| 4x Raptor 74G - RAID 0 \| Lite-On SOHD-16P9S \| Plextor PX-716A Laptop: Dell 640M \| T2050 \| 2x 512MB \| 120GB \| intel A/B/G \| Bluetooth File Server: P5GDC \| 330J \| 2x 512MB \| X700pro \| Promise S150 SX4 w/256MB \| 4x Seagate 200GB RAID 5 Other: Linksys WRT54GL \| Linksys EG008W \| LaserJet 1320n w/144MB

October 16th, 2006	#23
JCLW Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Toronto, at the moment Posts: 124	Thanks, Here's the intel page about it: http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets...storage_sb.htm Workstation: P5WD2-P \| 945D \| 2x 1GB \| X1950Pro XF \| 4x Raptor 74G - RAID 0 \| Lite-On SOHD-16P9S \| Plextor PX-716A Laptop: Dell 640M \| T2050 \| 2x 512MB \| 120GB \| intel A/B/G \| Bluetooth File Server: P5GDC \| 330J \| 2x 512MB \| X700pro \| Promise S150 SX4 w/256MB \| 4x Seagate 200GB RAID 5 Other: Linksys WRT54GL \| Linksys EG008W \| LaserJet 1320n w/144MB

October 16th, 2006	#24
jph1589 Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 367	Info Well I tried it both ways since I had the resources and time. From purely a hands on perspective, I'll keep the raid setup. Whether the performance boost is imaginary or not, perception is what really matters. Last week when I was writing the Media PC review, there were some times when I had quite a few things going at once and that is becoming pretty common on this system. So I guess maybe I don't really qualify as the average desktop user and maybe that is why my perception is that it makes a big difference. It was quite a nice bonus to find out that my new version of the VideoRedo program is multithreaded also. Between that and the Raid-0, those processes all have been reduced in length quite noticably. I posted the HD-Tach comparisons in my other thread about this build and it is really hard to look at them and imagine that things would't be faster..... a lot faster. The numbers were so drastically different that it is pretty hard to just write them off as a fluke. But then my understanding of how those speeds affect real life things stops with being able to observe and time processes that I usually perform. By doing that, I am convinced that Raid 0 is worth the trouble for me. That being said, it certainly isn't for the faint of heart. Having to hook up 20 year old technology (f....drive) and create a driver disk, only to have the windows install tell you that "MS windows XP already has that driver, are you sure you want to use this one?" So then why was it I had to do that floppy thing? I can't help but think it was simply to discourage me from using Raid. That is just my opinion on a grumpy monday morning though :> Commodore 64 overclocked into outerspace

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://forums.hardwarelogic.com/f20/should-i-go-raid-0-a-1370.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
Version traduite de la page http://forums.hardwarelogic.com/f20/should-i-go-raid-0-a-1370.html	This thread	Refback	April 7th, 2007 07:58

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Raid set-up	Badluck Inc	General Computing	6	February 15th, 2008 02:22
4 HD in Raid?	Nikolai	Peripherals	4	August 18th, 2007 21:35
RAID	Jokerswild	HL Lounge	3	July 1st, 2007 21:19
Raid 0 or no?	sean126	Peripherals	8	June 15th, 2007 21:36
What's with RAID?	hackman2007	Peripherals	10	December 19th, 2006 20:21

October 15th, 2006	#22
gvblake22 Modder-ator Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Tempe Desert Posts: 6,479 Blog Entries: 1	Welcome back JCLW!! And that is a very interesting idea with the Matrix RAID. I never knew you could do that. I have never gotten into the RAID scene myself, but it looks more and more tempting everytime I revisit the idea.

October 19th, 2006	#29
Hitman Functional Alcoholic Join Date: May 2006 Location: 14S E:561116 N:3830189 Posts: 4,587 Blog Entries: 2	Where did my RAID guide go?