Best RAID setup between these 4 drives

Which RAID setup makes the most sense?

  • 500GB in RAID0 --- 320GB in RAID1

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 320GB in RAID0 --- 500GB in RAID1

    Votes: 2 100.0%
  • Total voters
    2
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jimmy the Greek

Gawd
Joined
Aug 20, 2002
Messages
657
I have 4 HDDs:
  1. 500GB WD SATA II
  2. 500GB WD SATA II
  3. 320GB WD SATA II
  4. 320GB WD SATA I

I'd like to put two in a RAID0, and the other pair in RAID1. All things being equal and assuming that I'm an "average" user, what is the more logical setup?

Also, can the two 320GB drives even be placed in a RAID, given that they're different SATA versions and model numbers?
 
Something must be up with the forums. I can't even see this post in the sub-forum list, but it's on the front page of the forum view.
 
Another consideration: the 500GBs and the SATAII 320GB have 16MB cache, while the SATAI 320GB has 8MB. If I were to use the 2x320GBs in RAID0 as my OS drive, would this cause a noticeable performance hit?
 
Jimmy the Greek said:
I have 4 HDDs:
  1. 500GB WD SATA II
  2. 500GB WD SATA II
  3. 320GB WD SATA II
  4. 320GB WD SATA I

I'd like to put two in a RAID0, and the other pair in RAID1. All things being equal and assuming that I'm an "average" user, what is the more logical setup?

Also, can the two 320GB drives even be placed in a RAID, given that they're different SATA versions and model numbers?
Click to expand...

An average user doesnt need RAID.
Is there a reason you need RAID 1 or RAID 0?
 
Nenu said:
An average user doesnt need RAID.
Is there a reason you need RAID 1 or RAID 0?
Click to expand...

I'd like one large, fast drive for the OS, and a pair of redundant backup drives. In terms of being "average", my drive space is used primarily for games and music, no photo editing, 3d modeling source files, video editing, or anything out of the ordinary.

I have a 150GB Raptor as my OS drive right now, but it's too small and I'm constantly deleting programs so that I can install new ones. I'd like a larger drive, but don't want a huge performance hit that a single 7200RPM would bring, so RAID0 seems like the best option.
 
You should never be filling a 150GB drive with programs. I suggest you work on keeping a cleaner computer.
 
Why not install Games to a second hard drive and keep the Windows drive for Apps, thats what I do.
I only have a 30GB partition for Windows and its more than adequate despite my being an installation loony :)

ps I am on XP, add another 20GB to Windows partition size if using Vista!
 
dandragonrage said:
You should never be filling a 150GB drive with programs. I suggest you work on keeping a cleaner computer.
Click to expand...



If you play games you will know that it's not unheard of to use up to 10gigs or more per game in storage alone. Multiply this with just several of the latest games, and your storage shrinks fast.

Most people who are abandoning raptors are picking up those fast 750gig hard drives.
 
Jimmy the Greek said:
I'd like one large, fast drive for the OS, and a pair of redundant backup drives.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, that's not a 'backup'. How about the two 320's in RAID0 (primary partition of 450gb or less) with an image of them on the 500's in RAID1 for when your RAID0 array fails?
 
[LYL]Homer;1031941188 said:
Just to be clear, that's not a 'backup'. How about the two 320's in RAID0 (primary partition of 450gb or less) with an image of them on the 500's in RAID1 for when your RAID0 array fails?
Click to expand...

My idea was to store critical files (music, documents) on the RAID1 array, and not care if the RAID0 failed, but yeah.

Any ideas about the 320GB SATA I 8MB bottlenecking a RAID0 array?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top