Is this worth doing? (from 2 raptors to 4)

[fubar569]

I currently have 2 74gb raptors in a RAID 0...coming from a 15k SCSI setup this is about the slowest i'd ever want to go...it got rid of ALOT of clutter and offers performance on par according to benchmarks...

my question being...is it worth it to expand the RAID 0 from 2 drives to 4? what kind of a difference are we talking about as far as read, write, transfer rate, seek times, etc...

theoretically it should be faster...question is how much...and is it worth it with these drives hovering around 35-60 bucks used when AALS drives are just a bit more new...

i really don't keep alot of files aside from music and whatnot on this computer. once i have a WHS built i doubt i'll keep much of anything on it...the capacity isn't the bottleneck in other words...i don't mind it keeping my primary drives smaller...i'd trade it for the speed...

my other consideration would be to use all 4 in a RAID 5 for a ~200gb fault tolerant array offering a slight bump in speed with some sort of data security...again with the plans to build a WHS box i'm not sure keeping a local fault tolerant array would be worth any added expense either...

thoughts?

 

[Lazn_Work]

4 in RAID 5 with a hardware controller might give some bump in speed, but might not, and with a motherboard based controller it would be slower than a single drive.

Also, it's worth asking: how good is your backup system, or rather how important the data you work with? As RAID 0 creates a higher risk to your data.

I see that you plan to use WHS so I guess you are willing to accept the down time of a rebuild if a drive fails.. In that case RAID 0 with 4 drives is fast.. But a couple of 640 AALS drives, short stroked, might be faster yet.

 

[fubar569]

4 in RAID 5 with a hardware controller might give some bump in speed, but might not, and with a motherboard based controller it would be slower than a single drive.

Also, it's worth asking: how good is your backup system, or rather how important the data you work with? As RAID 0 creates a higher risk to your data.

I see that you plan to use WHS so I guess you are willing to accept the down time of a rebuild if a drive fails.. In that case RAID 0 with 4 drives is fast.. But a couple of 640 AALS drives, short stroked, might be faster yet.

I've gotten good with my backups...i have a external drive with a copy of all vital files and 7 DVD's worth of files burned...anything else i have install cd's for or can re-download...

your 2nd point is what had me thinking. for what i'd have invested in 4 raptors...i could sell the 2 i just bought, plus take the cash i'd spend on 2 more and buy 2 of the AALS drives. the benchmarks in the other thread show a much higher sustained transfer rate with 2 short stroked AALS drives in RAID 0 compared to 2 raptors but i wondered if 4 would be able to close the gap...my guess is more than likely not...

as for what to do with the extra space on the short stroked AALS drives...a RAID 0 for the OS would be fast...and i could RAID 1 the remainder for data...but then if a drive fails...how the bloody hell would that situation work out? i wouldn't have an OS, but by theory i should still be able to access my data...in practice however i see that being a much different story...

 

[nitrobass24]

Sell the 2 Raptors you have now for sure....there is no point in buying more of them.

Then get two of the 74gb velociraptors or two 160gb velociraptors

This will be faster then two AALS and have better seek times.

 

[fubar569]

Sell the 2 Raptors you have now for sure....there is no point in buying more of them.

Then get two of the 74gb velociraptors or two 160gb velociraptors

This will be faster then two AALS and have better seek times.

i was not aware of a 74gb velociraptor...

i was aware of an 80gb but had only seen it direct from WD as a warranty upgrade replacement...

thanks for making me want to spend more money...lol

 

[Lazn_Work]

I've gotten good with my backups...i have a external drive with a copy of all vital files and 7 DVD's worth of files burned...anything else i have install cd's for or can re-download...

your 2nd point is what had me thinking. for what i'd have invested in 4 raptors...i could sell the 2 i just bought, plus take the cash i'd spend on 2 more and buy 2 of the AALS drives. the benchmarks in the other thread show a much higher sustained transfer rate with 2 short stroked AALS drives in RAID 0 compared to 2 raptors but i wondered if 4 would be able to close the gap...my guess is more than likely not...

as for what to do with the extra space on the short stroked AALS drives...a RAID 0 for the OS would be fast...and i could RAID 1 the remainder for data...but then if a drive fails...how the bloody hell would that situation work out? i wouldn't have an OS, but by theory i should still be able to access my data...in practice however i see that being a much different story...

Simple, either put the good drive into another system to read the data partition, or reinstall to the now empty small boot partition.

 

[vsboxerboy]

The 74/80 GB VRs are both physically the same IIRC, one just has the innermost portion unaddressable. The 80GBs were sold only to OEMs in bulk so while you can definitely find them, they're not the easiest to find (edit: it appears that the 74GB is on the egg for $99). You might, however, consider waiting to see what the new non-Jmicron controlled SSDs (ie the vertex) bring to the table, sell your raptors, and buy one of those.

 

[vsboxerboy]

Newegg product review:

For a new build I bought a new 300 Raptor from the 'egg. That drive was fast, but just for the heck of it I hooked up two older 74's in RAID0.

Yikes, please tell me this guy is not running a RAID 0 with two VASTLY different drives?!? I knew these reviews aren't always written by the most savvy people, but who think that is a good idea?

 

[DonDon]

Newegg product review:



Yikes, please tell me this guy is not running a RAID 0 with two VASTLY different drives?!? I knew these reviews aren't always written by the most savvy people, but who think that is a good idea?

Oh it will work just fine. The array is limited to the speed of the slowest drive in the array.

Don