Performance RAID 10 vs. RAID 0

D

djBon2112

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
5,279
Creating a RAID 10 array gives my data more protection, but does it have a unnoticeable performance hit compared to plain old RAID 0? Or would I be better off with a RAID 5 array? I have RAID 0 mainly to create a single large physical disk, not performance, though a large performance hit would obviously be unacceptable.

Any suggestions?
 
Depends on what you are using the array for, RAID 5 is great for data storage, files, images, videos etc. RAID 10 is better for a lot of read/writes on it, hence why it is used a lot in SQL databases.
Because it really is just RAID 0 for speed plus RAID 1 for redundancy of failures, RAID 5 has to read/write from all of the drives in the array.
 
So from a purely technical point of view, RAID 5 with three disks is always making three writes, while RAID 10 is always making at most two, am I correct? So for lots of writes RAID 10 is more efficient, but it does require the extra disk.

The drive is basically my random stuff drive (i.e. downloads, etc.), and it's Audition's Temp drive when I do audio stuff. All my Windows stuff, programs, music, etc. is on my main drive (which will eventually be a Raptor :p), not the raid. Would you recommend RAID 5 then?
 
RAID 5 can perform very well, like I said, if it is a lot of writes, then maybe RAID 10 is the better way to go.
Hopefully these sites can help you make a more informed decision, it lists the availability, reads, writes, etc on them.
RAID 10 vs. RAID 5
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top