• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

What can I do with this?

S

Siriusmuzik

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
1,446
74GB Raptor and two 640GB blacks?

How would you guys set this up? I was going to ditch the 74GB and run RAID 0 for the 640GB's, but is there a better idea?


Thanks!
 
If you don't mind the noise from the 74GB Raptor, I'd set up the Raptor as the OS disk only and for high-access video games or applications, and use the 640GBs as general storage and secondary game disks. Game load times are largely dependent upon sequential read speeds, which the 640GBs and the Raptor 74GB is sufficient at, but putting the OS on the 10,000 RPM disk has benefits of random access reads that OS's often utilize. In general, you should be able to maintain a relatively "snappy" OS environment with a low-access time disk like the Raptor 74GB.
 
syntax error,

Thanks for your advice.
I'm a nub when it comes to harddrives so a bit of what you say is still confusing.
So can I still set the two 640GB into a RAID 0 set up and still have it "connected" to the 74GB drive and use it as an OS?

Basically, I want to be able to boot games up that are installed on the 640GB while on my 74GB raptor.

I don't know if this is possible,

Thanks again
 
Syntax Error said:
If you don't mind the noise from the 74GB Raptor, I'd set up the Raptor as the OS disk only and for high-access video games or applications, and use the 640GBs as general storage and secondary game disks. Game load times are largely dependent upon sequential read speeds, which the 640GBs and the Raptor 74GB is sufficient at, but putting the OS on the 10,000 RPM disk has benefits of random access reads that OS's often utilize. In general, you should be able to maintain a relatively "snappy" OS environment with a low-access time disk like the Raptor 74GB.
Click to expand...

QFT
 
Siriusmuzik said:
syntax error,

Thanks for your advice.
I'm a nub when it comes to harddrives so a bit of what you say is still confusing.
So can I still set the two 640GB into a RAID 0 set up and still have it "connected" to the 74GB drive and use it as an OS?

Basically, I want to be able to boot games up that are installed on the 640GB while on my 74GB raptor.

I don't know if this is possible,

Thanks again
Click to expand...
You don't "connect" 640GB RAID 0 array to the 74GB Raptor. You just leave it as a second hard drive. Then when you're installing games, make sure the game installs onto the 640GB RAID 0 array.

With that said, don't bother with a RAID 0 array just for installing games onto. Just do what Syntax Error said and don't set the 640GB drives into RAID 0. Just leave them as storage and game install drives respectively. One 640GB for your game installs and one 640GB for general storage. Simple as that. No RAID.
 
I'd put the OS on the Raptor. Low seek times make an OS feel snappy. A Raid-0 or a single WD Black might boot faster at least with Vista or Win 7 (IIRC Vista optimizes the layout of files read during boot), but once the system is up and running reads from the OS disk will mostly be from small files.

If you can, I'd set up the 640s as a mix of Raid-1 (mirrored) and normal (no raid) partitions, or Raid-1 and Raid-0. Perhaps even a mix of all three. It depends on what you use the machine for. Raid-0 is nice for many games and some applications (though I have a couple games that are almost entirely seek limited - less than 1GB spread out over around 30,000 files). Use the Raid-1 part for your important stuff. Yes, you should back it up. But we all forget/slack off/etc.
 
Hi all,

Thanks for the great advice. I'll take it all into consideration.

EnderW - The model number is WD740GD-50FLA2. I think that might be an older one?
 
Another question -

Why even consider raid 1 when you can do Raid 1+0? It seems you get the same storage space and redudancy, but the added benefit of speed. So why even consider a Raid 1?

Thank you
 
Siriusmuzik said:
Another question -

Why even consider raid 1 when you can do Raid 1+0? It seems you get the same storage space and redudancy, but the added benefit of speed. So why even consider a Raid 1?

Thank you
Click to expand...
RAID 10 requires a minimum of 4 disks
 
Great, thanks.

I read on a reliable source that RAID 10 required only 2 drives. Must have been a typo because now it makes sense. Truly, if it were the case that only 2 disks were required, no one would do RAID 0 or RAID 1.

Thanks all
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top