runLoganrun
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2005
- Messages
- 601
are two 75G sata 2 drives in raid0 going to be faster than one 150G raptor? the raptor is 10k, but it's only sata 1.
Thanks,
rlr
Thanks,
rlr
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You have to remember that if you have a drive failure, your data is pretty much gone.
I keep seeing this, but if you have 1 drive and have a drive failure, your data is still gone. No offense, I'm just being master of the obvious.
RAID 0 with 2 74GB raptors would beat a single 150GB Raptor, but you are doubling your chance of losing all your data.
The SATA 1 vs SATA 2 argument has no merit at this point. there is no advantage with SATA 2 at all. Hard drives simply can't transfer data fast enough to take up all of the SATA 1 bandwidth.
Yes and anyone who puts real data (non-recoverable or duplicatable) on a raid 0 is a moron.
Everyone should have raid 1 for anything remotely important, if you cant have that then just 1 drive would be next but to put real data on a raid 0 would be like driving drunk with no seatbelt.
I keep seeing this, but if you have 1 drive and have a drive failure, your data is still gone. No offense, I'm just being master of the obvious.
To answer the question, on small files the raptor which has a faster seek time would be faster. For transferring large files the RAID would win. Which do you do more of? If you work with small files go raptor, otherwise go RAID.
It's for gaming, general windows, burning cd/dvd, photoshop.
thanks,
rlr
But if each drive has a 10% failure rate, the chance of losing all your data using one drive is 10%. With RAID 0 it's 20%, as you only need either one of the drives to fail to loase all your data.
But if each drive has a 10% failure rate, the chance of losing all your data using one drive is 10%. With RAID 0 it's 20%, as you only need either one of the drives to fail to loase all your data.
It depends on your application. RAID0 is going to be slower for lots of random seeks and small (less than a stripe-sized) accesses.I want to know simply which is faster??
I'd go with four of them and go with Raid 5.... Raid 5 rocks!!
I'd go with four of them and go with Raid 5.... Raid 5 rocks!!
Agreed, and you can actually do it with 3 drives. 4 is faster though.
[LYL]Homer;1032097390 said:For the record, and the OP, RAID 5 still will not save you from a controller failure. The general feeling is that on-motherboard RAID5 controllers are less robust than dedicated add-in cards.
the raptor is 10k, but it's only sata 1