Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (
More info?)
I decided to go with raid simply because I move large files around a lot and
even with the fast hard drives that I had (ultra 160 scsi, 7200rpm 8mb cache
ide) the hard drives were a definate bottleneck in an otherwise fast system,
P4 2GHz, Asus P4T-E mobo, 512 MB RDRAM. I realise there is an increased risk
of data loss with raid and while I can't speak for any one else I consider
myself to be a power user but I do backup regularly. I think anyone whose
been computing for a while will have lost some data so they know the
importance of regular backups. Another advantage with raid is the size of
partitions. I just bought 2x250 GB Maxtor Maxline 2 hard drives and created
5 partitions with the storage partition being 390 GB. So where I had to
spread my stored files over multiple partitions I can now keep them
altogether. In an ideal world I would purchase another 2 Maxtor hard drives
and create a RAID 0 +1 which would almost eliminate any data loss. The
probability of two hard drives failing at the same time is almost nill.
I wrote the above then read the article from the web site you suggested.
They seem to state the obvious in that application wont run faster. You
would have to have a very limited understanding of computers to think that
apps will run faster from a raid system. Getting data (applications) into
ram will most times be faster with raid but running them is the processors
job. I know this is simplifying matters but it will suffice for this email.
As I said I went for raid as I move large files around and my system is
faster because of it. It is obviously up to the individual to run their
computer in a way that suits their need. As most of us are new to using raid
time will tell if the benefits outway the risks.
One last point, noise. I previously had an ultra 160 scsi as my boot drive
and after benchmarking it against a 7200rpm 8mb cache ide Maxtor I ended up
having the ide as the boot drive because I couldn't stand the noise from the
scsi drive anymore. As for the noise level from my maxtor maxline 2 drives
you can't hear them. They are very quite. My single ide maxtor is noisier
than the two in my raid.
Enigma
"Stephan Grossklass" <sgrokla-nospam04q2@yahoo.de> wrote in message
news:c9vb02$eki$01$1@news.t-online.com...
> Enigma schrieb:
> >
> > I have to disagree with the view that RAID 0 performace gains are
minimal. I
> > have just set up a RAID 0 on the intel chip as I work with large
collections
> > of files. I have found that moving files or anything that needs to
access
> > data off the hard drive is faster.
>
> This sounds like the access pattern were largely sequential. This is
> indeed an area where RAID 0 shows some benefits. (Another would be
> server use when accesses are <= stripe size.) In all-day life desktop
> applications, however, gains are rather small. RAID 0 won't do anything
> in terms of felt "snappiness" (that's where lower physical access times
> rule), plus the chance of total data loss is approximately doubled over
> a single drive. (And what percentage of self-proclaimed "power users"
> makes regular backups?) Also, two drives are always going to be more
> noisy than just one, and two drives of the same type or at least
> rotational speed can also cause some annoying beat tones. (Which I
> promptly did not remember when purchasing a second Cheetah 36ES, which
> then had to go into another computer.)
>
> > Where do you get your info from?
>
>
http://faq.storagereview.com/tiki-index.php?page=SingleDriveVsRaid0
>
> Stephan
> --
> Meine Andere Seite: http://stephan.win31.de/
> PC#6: i440BX, 1xP3-500E, 512 MiB, 18+80 GB, R9k AGP 64 MiB, 110W
> This is a SCSI-inside, Legacy-plus, TCPA-free computer
> Mail to From: not read, see homepg. | Real gelesene Mailadr. s. Homep.