Intel 875 Mobo and RAID. Is this rightso far?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Hi all.
I'm a total novice. Until now frustrated by unreliable and rapidly
out-of-date PCs and without the knowledge to cope
with disasters, I have decided to "build my own" using reputable
manufacturers with good back-up service; starting
small with potential to enlarge; building in a degree of future-proofing and
learning all about it on the way. I'm still
at the design stage and have (pretty well) decided on a mobo, an Intel
D875PBZ.

First problem:
The above mobo has 2 Serial ATA IDE interfaces with RAID 0 and RAID 1
support.
And also 2 Parallel ATA IDE interfaces with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support.

Am I thinking correctly here? (apologies if the vocab is inappropriate!):

A These 4 interfaces will altogether ultimately support up to 8 devices.
B The SATA interfaces with increased bandwidth will be best as the primary
supporting the HDDs.
C ATA interfaces require 80 conductor cable and devices using the Cable
Select position..
D SATA interfaces require the new thin flexible cable and also use Cable
Select..
E It would in theory be possible to use the new flexible cable for all 4
interfaces and all 8 devices.

F I can use one SATA interface solely for the OS and other software
progs, and the second SATA
for personal stuff. If so, would this involve changed settings in BIOS and
how?
G RAID 0 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface (4 HDDs in
all) would enable
striping and improve performance.
H Alternatively RAID 1 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface
(4 HDDs in all)
would enable mirroring and improve security.
I It would NOT be possible to RAID 0 the OS HDD interface and at the
same time RAID 1 the other interface
(or variations thereon: single OS/progs drive but mirrored personal drive
for backup security) or would it? If so, how?
J Until I acquire 4 drives, RAID can be turned off (or is simply
ineffective) and I can have 1 SATA drive on each interface.
K With RAID on or off, suitable quiet SATA HDDs would be 80GB Seagate
Barracuda 7200s.
L Purely theoretical this - could you in fact run RAID levels 0 + 1
simultaneously on three drives, using a single main HDD
for everything which is both striped and mirrored? Or would that then
automatically require four drives?

Finally:
L Any reputable CD RW and DVD RW will work comfortably together each
sitting on the remaining two ADA interfaces.

All comments most gratefully received, particularly on anything obvious I
have overlooked.

I've already learnt lots from lurking. And for that too, many thanks.

Kevin

 

[Jim]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"K G Wood" <kgwood@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:c5ouke$jqi$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
> Hi all.
> I'm a total novice. Until now frustrated by unreliable and rapidly
> out-of-date PCs and without the knowledge to cope
> with disasters, I have decided to "build my own" using reputable
> manufacturers with good back-up service; starting
> small with potential to enlarge; building in a degree of future-proofing
and
> learning all about it on the way. I'm still
> at the design stage and have (pretty well) decided on a mobo, an Intel
> D875PBZ.
>
> First problem:
> The above mobo has 2 Serial ATA IDE interfaces with RAID 0 and RAID 1
> support.
> And also 2 Parallel ATA IDE interfaces with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support.
>
> Am I thinking correctly here? (apologies if the vocab is inappropriate!):
>
> A These 4 interfaces will altogether ultimately support up to 8 devices.

6, 1 per SATA port (2) + 2 per IDE channel (2)

> B The SATA interfaces with increased bandwidth will be best as the
primary
> supporting the HDDs.

Theoretically true. But unless you buy "true" SATA HDs, like the WD Raptor
line, you'll probably experience very little improvement over standard IDE
drives. Many so-called SATA drives are nothing more than PATA (parallel
ATA) drives in "SATA clothing"! (and selling at a premium to boot). These
drives simply bridge the old PATA interface to the new SATA interface. IOW,
they're the same, exact HD, just a difference interface. Since it's the HD
internal technology that's the limiting factor (at least today), the
interface is almost irrelevant. In most cases, it's just asthetics,
convenience, etc., such as narrower cables.

SATA provides the foundation for future improvements in HD technology, so
that when the HD internals do improve, the interface won't be a limiting
factor. As of today, your best ATA100/133 IDE HD can't even saturate the
ATA100/133 interface, let alone SATA. You'd be lucky to get 30MB/sec w/ a
standalone IDE HD. You only get saturation on HD "bursts", not for
sustained throughput. The only exception to-date is the WD Raptor line,
which are *real* SATA drives in the sense they have been seriously
re-engineered, run 10k RPM, sub 6ms response time (if I recall correctly),
very fast, esp. in RAID0 configurations. Of course, you pay dearly ($$$)
for that privilege.

> C ATA interfaces require 80 conductor cable and devices using the Cable
> Select position..

PATA or SATA?? The SATA interface uses a completely new cable. The older,
standard ATA100/133 IDE cable is 80-wire 40-pin.

> D SATA interfaces require the new thin flexible cable and also use
Cable
> Select..

SATA is 1 port to 1 HD, the concept of cable select doesn't even exist.

> E It would in theory be possible to use the new flexible cable for all
4
> interfaces and all 8 devices.
>

No, IDE uses the standard ATA100/133 IDE cable, 80-wire 40-pin, SATA uses
it's own special cable.

> F I can use one SATA interface solely for the OS and other software
> progs, and the second SATA
> for personal stuff. If so, would this involve changed settings in BIOS
and
> how?

You can use one SATA HD for one thing, the other for something else.
Nothing special here, its no different than IDE HDs. Divide them up
physically (i.e., partition) or logically (OS, data, porn collection), any
way you want!! The BIOS only determines which interfaces (SATA and PATA)
are ENABLED, which are bootable, which boots first, etc., the BIOS has no
bearing on "logical usage", that's up to YOU!

> G RAID 0 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface (4 HDDs in
> all) would enable
> striping and improve performance.

No, one SATA HD per port, there are usually at most 2 ports, so this limits
you to 2 HDs in either RAID0 or RAID1 configuration. Some mobo vendors add
more ports, but its always one SATA HD per port. RAID0 read and writes in
parallel, you'll probably see an overall performance increase of ~60% over a
single, standalone HD.

> H Alternatively RAID 1 support with an extra HDD on each SATA
interface
> (4 HDDs in all)
> would enable mirroring and improve security.

Same concepts as above, one SATA HD per SATA port. RAID1, mirroring is
pretty basic, just clones one HD to the other in realtime, not much more
complex than that.

> I It would NOT be possible to RAID 0 the OS HDD interface and at the
> same time RAID 1 the other interface
> (or variations thereon: single OS/progs drive but mirrored personal drive
> for backup security) or would it? If so, how?

I only use IDE based RAID, using a Promise FastTrak100 TX2 PCI controller
card I picked up on eBay for $35. This supports 4 HDs. I've placed the OS
on a pair of HDs in RAID0 for performance, and my data on two HDs in RAID1
for protection. This consumes all available ports on that PCI card.

The problem on that Intel mobo is that it's probably limited to 2 SATA HDs
(1 per port), so you either have to chose RAID0 or RAID1! You either life
w/ that limitation, OR, find another mobo that supports more SATA HDs *and*
does so w/ RAID support (be careful, RAID may only be employed on *some* of
the ports). OR, you do what I did and get a PCI card, either SATA or IDE,
whatever you prefer. They come in different port counts, some even have
BOTH IDE and SATA. In general, I strongly recommend Promise, their stuff is
very reliable.

> J Until I acquire 4 drives, RAID can be turned off (or is simply
> ineffective) and I can have 1 SATA drive on each interface.

RAID is obviously irrelevant until you have at least 2 HDs. At that point,
you can implement RAID as long as the interface supports it. It's best to
have identical drives.

> K With RAID on or off, suitable quiet SATA HDDs would be 80GB Seagate
> Barracuda 7200s.

If you're asking if the Seagate are quiet, the answer is yes, IMO, the
quietest available, they have no equal in that department. Of course, the
Seagates don't usually come out on top in performance either, for this very
reason, all that fluid that dampens noise, also slows the mechanics
slightly, but they do tend to come out in the middle of the pack, not awful,
just average. But if noise reduction is vital, the Seagates are DEAD
SILENT. If you want a little more performance, the WD or Maxtor are a
little faster, but slightly noisier (not a lot, but not deal silent either).
Lastly, nothing beats the WD Raptors for pure "speed", and although I've not
heard them myself, I suspect they are noiser, they are certainly known to
run "hotter".

> L Purely theoretical this - could you in fact run RAID levels 0 + 1
> simultaneously on three drives, using a single main HDD
> for everything which is both striped and mirrored? Or would that then
> automatically require four drives?
>

In theory, yes, but it wouldn't make sense in practical terms. You need two
HDs to benefit from RAID0 (stripping) performance, right? Let's say you
only want to add a third HD for mirroring. At first, this seems plausible.
Problem is, since the third *standalone* HD is *slower* than the RAID0
array, it negates the effects of the RAID0 array!!! IOW, the mirroring HD
(RAID1) must "keep up" w/ the RAID0 if you don't want to slow the RAID0
array down to standalone speed. In such an arrangement, the RAID0 array
would complete a write in say 10ms, but would then have to "wait" for the
standalone drive to complete the mirrored write (maybe 14ms), not good. The
correct solution is to have 4 HDs, so that the mirrored *pair* are *also*
running RAID0! Of course, this is why having all the HDs be IDENTICAL makes
sense, you don't want any single pokey HD slowing down the process.

> Finally:
> L Any reputable CD RW and DVD RW will work comfortably together each
> sitting on the remaining two ADA interfaces.
>

PATA interfaces? Yes, any standard IDE mobo interface will support your
optical drives, that's pretty standard stuff. FYI, eventually, of course,
future optical drives will be SATA too, and SATA will support all kinds of
devices. That's neither here or there right now, just to be complete.

HTH

Jim


> All comments most gratefully received, particularly on anything obvious I
> have overlooked.
>
> I've already learnt lots from lurking. And for that too, many thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"K G Wood" <kgwood@btconnect.com> wrote...
> I'm still
> at the design stage and have (pretty well) decided on a mobo, an Intel
> D875PBZ.
>
> First problem:
> The above mobo has 2 Serial ATA IDE interfaces with RAID 0 and RAID 1
> support.
> And also 2 Parallel ATA IDE interfaces with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support.
>
> Am I thinking correctly here? (apologies if the vocab is inappropriate!):
>
> A These 4 interfaces will altogether ultimately support up to 8 devices.

6: 1 each for the SATA and 2 each for the IDE.


> B The SATA interfaces with increased bandwidth will be best as the primary
> supporting the HDDs.

Yes.


> C ATA interfaces require 80 conductor cable and devices using the Cable
> Select position..

Depends on the mobo. I haven't used cable select in a while; I normally use the
Master/Slave jumpers on the IDE devices.


> D SATA interfaces require the new thin flexible cable and also use Cable
> Select..

I'm new to SATA, but I believe SATA supports 1 device per cable, so Cable Select
is moot.


> E It would in theory be possible to use the new flexible cable for all 4
> interfaces and all 8 devices.

Nope. The SATA cable is mucho different from IDE. However, I believe round
cables are available for IDE.


> F I can use one SATA interface solely for the OS and other software
> progs, and the second SATA
> for personal stuff. If so, would this involve changed settings in BIOS and
> how?

That's one option. Using 2 identical SATA drives in a RAID 0 (striping) array
for performance or RAID 1 (mirror) array for automatic backup are the other 2
options.


> G RAID 0 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface (4 HDDs in
> all) would enable striping and improve performance.

Half right: RAID 0 striping improves performance, but the limit is 1 drive per
cable, or total of 2.


> H Alternatively RAID 1 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface
> (4 HDDs in all) would enable mirroring and improve security.

Half right again. RAID 1 improves data integrity, but your limit is 2 drives.


> I It would NOT be possible to RAID 0 the OS HDD interface and at the
> same time RAID 1 the other interface
> (or variations thereon: single OS/progs drive but mirrored personal drive
> for backup security) or would it? If so, how?

I suppose you could use RAID 0 on the mobo interfaces and get an add-on card for
another RAID 1 interface, but that would be a bit ridiculous. Your data access
performance will be hampered by the lesser performance of the RAID 1 array.

If you're going to do that, you'd be better off getting a RAID 5 (usually SCSI)
controller. RAID 5 combines striping and data integrity with a minimum of 3
HDs; 4 HDs for less relative overhead. Any drive can fail; and you replcae the
drive and let the RAID controller rebuild the data using the CRC data it stores
among the data.


> J Until I acquire 4 drives, RAID can be turned off (or is simply
> ineffective) and I can have 1 SATA drive on each interface.

I don't think you can convert to a RAID array without data loss after initial
setup. You'd have to start from scratch. But if you're starting with 2 drives,
you can make that decision now.


> K With RAID on or off, suitable quiet SATA HDDs would be 80GB Seagate
> Barracuda 7200s.

Sure. Why not?


> L Purely theoretical this - could you in fact run RAID levels 0 + 1
> simultaneously on three drives, using a single main HDD
> for everything which is both striped and mirrored? Or would that then
> automatically require four drives?

See RAID 5 discussion above. Requires different controller.


> Finally:
> L Any reputable CD RW and DVD RW will work comfortably together each
> sitting on the remaining two ADA interfaces.

Yes. I think your best performance will be gained by making them each Master on
the separate ATA interfaces. That should optimize copying from one to the
other.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Jim" <null@null.com> wrote...
>
> Theoretically true. But unless you buy "true" SATA HDs, like the WD Raptor
> line, you'll probably experience very little improvement over standard IDE
> drives. Many so-called SATA drives are nothing more than PATA (parallel
> ATA) drives in "SATA clothing"! (and selling at a premium to boot).

Additionally, it pays to NOT jump at the first offerings... The first 37 GB
Raptor was good, but the 74 GB Raptor is even faster and quieter! Similarly,
the first-generation Seagate Cheetahs (10K RPM SCSI) were a bit noisy, but the
4th generation+ are very quiet.

I'm putting a pair of Raptor 74s (RAID 0) in my new machine, and will take the
SCSI160 Cheetah 36 out of the old machine and use it as the data backup drive.


> Of course, you pay dearly ($$$) for that privilege.

Well, if you sacrifice 3D graphics capability for the HD performance, it's
affordable. Of course, professional CAD users and "extreme" game players
(virtually the only ones who "need" all that 3D performance) always seem to have
enough $$ -- look at the prices of the "gaming" machines out there, especially
the fancy cases and liquid cooling systems that go with them!


> Lastly, nothing beats the WD Raptors for pure "speed", and although I've not
> heard them myself, I suspect they are noiser, they are certainly known to
> run "hotter".

Specs for the Raptors are VERY close to the generation 4+ SCSI Cheetahs, so I
expect noise, performance, and heat to be about the same. When the Raptors are
delivered, I'll know for sure...

 

[jt]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:37:50 +0000 (UTC), "K G Wood" <kgwood@btconnect.com>
wrote:

>Hi all.
>I'm a total novice. Until now frustrated by unreliable and rapidly
>out-of-date PCs and without the knowledge to cope
> with disasters, I have decided to "build my own" using reputable
>manufacturers with good back-up service; starting
>small with potential to enlarge; building in a degree of future-proofing and
>learning all about it on the way. I'm still
>at the design stage and have (pretty well) decided on a mobo, an Intel
>D875PBZ.
>
>First problem:
>The above mobo has 2 Serial ATA IDE interfaces with RAID 0 and RAID 1
>support.
>And also 2 Parallel ATA IDE interfaces with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support.
>
>Am I thinking correctly here? (apologies if the vocab is inappropriate!):
>
>A These 4 interfaces will altogether ultimately support up to 8 devices.
You can use 2 drives per cable on the PATA interfaces. SATA will only allow
1 per cable. Total: 6 drives.

>B The SATA interfaces with increased bandwidth will be best as the primary
>supporting the HDDs.
Normally that is the case. SATA would probably be the fastest.

>C ATA interfaces require 80 conductor cable and devices using the Cable
>Select position..
80 wire cable is required. You can still use jumpers, but make sure that
you have a drive at the end of the cable.

>D SATA interfaces require the new thin flexible cable and also use Cable
>Select..
SATA does require thinner cables. Haven't found them to be as flexible as
some of the older cables.

>E It would in theory be possible to use the new flexible cable for all 4
>interfaces and all 8 devices.
Not without adapters, which are not cheap.

>
>F I can use one SATA interface solely for the OS and other software
>progs, and the second SATA
>for personal stuff. If so, would this involve changed settings in BIOS and
>how?
Nothing different than any other multidrive setup.

>L Purely theoretical this - could you in fact run RAID levels 0 + 1
>simultaneously on three drives, using a single main HDD
>for everything which is both striped and mirrored? Or would that then
>automatically require four drives?
>
0+1 requires an even number of drives. If you get into the expensive
addon controllers, you can go raid 5, striped set with parity, which can
work with 3 drives, but normally is done with more.

>Finally:
>L Any reputable CD RW and DVD RW will work comfortably together each
>sitting on the remaining two ADA interfaces.
>
>All comments most gratefully received, particularly on anything obvious I
>have overlooked.
>
>I've already learnt lots from lurking. And for that too, many thanks.
>
>Kevin
>


JT

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

K G Wood wrote:
> Hi all.
> I'm a total novice. Until now frustrated by unreliable and rapidly
> out-of-date PCs and without the knowledge to cope
> with disasters, I have decided to "build my own" using reputable
> manufacturers with good back-up service; starting
> small with potential to enlarge; building in a degree of future-proofing and
> learning all about it on the way. I'm still
> at the design stage and have (pretty well) decided on a mobo, an Intel
> D875PBZ.
>
> First problem:
> The above mobo has 2 Serial ATA IDE interfaces with RAID 0 and RAID 1
> support.
> And also 2 Parallel ATA IDE interfaces with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support.
>
> Am I thinking correctly here? (apologies if the vocab is inappropriate!):
>
> A These 4 interfaces will altogether ultimately support up to 8 devices.
> B The SATA interfaces with increased bandwidth will be best as the primary
> supporting the HDDs.
> C ATA interfaces require 80 conductor cable and devices using the Cable
> Select position..
> D SATA interfaces require the new thin flexible cable and also use Cable
> Select..
> E It would in theory be possible to use the new flexible cable for all 4
> interfaces and all 8 devices.
>
> F I can use one SATA interface solely for the OS and other software
> progs, and the second SATA
> for personal stuff. If so, would this involve changed settings in BIOS and
> how?
> G RAID 0 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface (4 HDDs in
> all) would enable
> striping and improve performance.
> H Alternatively RAID 1 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface
> (4 HDDs in all)
> would enable mirroring and improve security.
> I It would NOT be possible to RAID 0 the OS HDD interface and at the
> same time RAID 1 the other interface
> (or variations thereon: single OS/progs drive but mirrored personal drive
> for backup security) or would it? If so, how?
> J Until I acquire 4 drives, RAID can be turned off (or is simply
> ineffective) and I can have 1 SATA drive on each interface.
> K With RAID on or off, suitable quiet SATA HDDs would be 80GB Seagate
> Barracuda 7200s.
> L Purely theoretical this - could you in fact run RAID levels 0 + 1
> simultaneously on three drives, using a single main HDD
> for everything which is both striped and mirrored? Or would that then
> automatically require four drives?
>
> Finally:
> L Any reputable CD RW and DVD RW will work comfortably together each
> sitting on the remaining two ADA interfaces.
>
> All comments most gratefully received, particularly on anything obvious I
> have overlooked.
>
> I've already learnt lots from lurking. And for that too, many thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
>
Be aware that Intel uses 24-pin power connectors and does NOT adhere to
the ATA specs on their main boards! So, be prepared to check it out on
their web site, and get the special PSU, for your board!

I highly recommend you buy the Intel server tower that is recommended
for that board!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

The Raptors are not true SATA drives. They use a SATA to PATA bridge.
But who cares, they perform very well. And some SATA adapters are not
true SATA either, such as the Highpoint SATA controllers. If you end up
with this combo, you'll have PATA->SATA->SATA->PATA.

To the original poster: the performance differences between PATA and
SATA for single drives is not noticeable. Any differences will be due to
drivers and/or mfg implementation. For RAID-0 there is typically a
performance increase, but only for outer-edge disk transfers.

Jim wrote:

> "K G Wood" <kgwood@btconnect.com> wrote in message
> news:c5ouke$jqi$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
>
>> Hi all. I'm a total novice. Until now frustrated by unreliable and
>> rapidly out-of-date PCs and without the knowledge to cope with
>> disasters, I have decided to "build my own" using reputable
>> manufacturers with good back-up service; starting small with
>> potential to enlarge; building in a degree of future-proofing
>
> and
>
>> learning all about it on the way. I'm still at the design stage
>> and have (pretty well) decided on a mobo, an Intel D875PBZ.
>>
>> First problem: The above mobo has 2 Serial ATA IDE interfaces with
>> RAID 0 and RAID 1 support. And also 2 Parallel ATA IDE interfaces
>> with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support.
>>
>> Am I thinking correctly here? (apologies if the vocab is
>> inappropriate!):
>>
>> A These 4 interfaces will altogether ultimately support up to 8
>> devices.
>
>
> 6, 1 per SATA port (2) + 2 per IDE channel (2)
>
>
>> B The SATA interfaces with increased bandwidth will be best as
>> the
>
> primary
>
>> supporting the HDDs.
>
>
> Theoretically true. But unless you buy "true" SATA HDs, like the WD
> Raptor line, you'll probably experience very little improvement over
> standard IDE drives. Many so-called SATA drives are nothing more
> than PATA (parallel ATA) drives in "SATA clothing"! (and selling at a
> premium to boot). These drives simply bridge the old PATA interface
> to the new SATA interface. IOW, they're the same, exact HD, just a
> difference interface. Since it's the HD internal technology that's
> the limiting factor (at least today), the interface is almost
> irrelevant. In most cases, it's just asthetics, convenience, etc.,
> such as narrower cables.
>
> SATA provides the foundation for future improvements in HD
> technology, so that when the HD internals do improve, the interface
> won't be a limiting factor. As of today, your best ATA100/133 IDE HD
> can't even saturate the ATA100/133 interface, let alone SATA. You'd
> be lucky to get 30MB/sec w/ a standalone IDE HD. You only get
> saturation on HD "bursts", not for sustained throughput. The only
> exception to-date is the WD Raptor line, which are *real* SATA drives
> in the sense they have been seriously re-engineered, run 10k RPM, sub
> 6ms response time (if I recall correctly), very fast, esp. in RAID0
> configurations. Of course, you pay dearly ($$$) for that privilege.
>
>
>> C ATA interfaces require 80 conductor cable and devices using the
>> Cable Select position..
>
>
> PATA or SATA?? The SATA interface uses a completely new cable. The
> older, standard ATA100/133 IDE cable is 80-wire 40-pin.
>
>
>> D SATA interfaces require the new thin flexible cable and also
>> use
>
> Cable
>
>> Select..
>
>
> SATA is 1 port to 1 HD, the concept of cable select doesn't even
> exist.
>
>
>> E It would in theory be possible to use the new flexible cable
>> for all
>
> 4
>
>> interfaces and all 8 devices.
>>
>
>
> No, IDE uses the standard ATA100/133 IDE cable, 80-wire 40-pin, SATA
> uses it's own special cable.
>
>
>> F I can use one SATA interface solely for the OS and other
>> software progs, and the second SATA for personal stuff. If so,
>> would this involve changed settings in BIOS
>
> and
>
>> how?
>
>
> You can use one SATA HD for one thing, the other for something else.
> Nothing special here, its no different than IDE HDs. Divide them up
> physically (i.e., partition) or logically (OS, data, porn
> collection), any way you want!! The BIOS only determines which
> interfaces (SATA and PATA) are ENABLED, which are bootable, which
> boots first, etc., the BIOS has no bearing on "logical usage", that's
> up to YOU!
>
>
>> G RAID 0 support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface (4
>> HDDs in all) would enable striping and improve performance.
>
>
> No, one SATA HD per port, there are usually at most 2 ports, so this
> limits you to 2 HDs in either RAID0 or RAID1 configuration. Some
> mobo vendors add more ports, but its always one SATA HD per port.
> RAID0 read and writes in parallel, you'll probably see an overall
> performance increase of ~60% over a single, standalone HD.
>
>
>> H Alternatively RAID 1 support with an extra HDD on each SATA
>
> interface
>
>> (4 HDDs in all) would enable mirroring and improve security.
>
>
> Same concepts as above, one SATA HD per SATA port. RAID1, mirroring
> is pretty basic, just clones one HD to the other in realtime, not
> much more complex than that.
>
>
>> I It would NOT be possible to RAID 0 the OS HDD interface and
>> at the same time RAID 1 the other interface (or variations thereon:
>> single OS/progs drive but mirrored personal drive for backup
>> security) or would it? If so, how?
>
>
> I only use IDE based RAID, using a Promise FastTrak100 TX2 PCI
> controller card I picked up on eBay for $35. This supports 4 HDs.
> I've placed the OS on a pair of HDs in RAID0 for performance, and my
> data on two HDs in RAID1 for protection. This consumes all available
> ports on that PCI card.
>
> The problem on that Intel mobo is that it's probably limited to 2
> SATA HDs (1 per port), so you either have to chose RAID0 or RAID1!
> You either life w/ that limitation, OR, find another mobo that
> supports more SATA HDs *and* does so w/ RAID support (be careful,
> RAID may only be employed on *some* of the ports). OR, you do what I
> did and get a PCI card, either SATA or IDE, whatever you prefer.
> They come in different port counts, some even have BOTH IDE and SATA.
> In general, I strongly recommend Promise, their stuff is very
> reliable.
>
>
>> J Until I acquire 4 drives, RAID can be turned off (or is
>> simply ineffective) and I can have 1 SATA drive on each interface.
>
>
> RAID is obviously irrelevant until you have at least 2 HDs. At that
> point, you can implement RAID as long as the interface supports it.
> It's best to have identical drives.
>
>
>> K With RAID on or off, suitable quiet SATA HDDs would be 80GB
>> Seagate Barracuda 7200s.
>
>
> If you're asking if the Seagate are quiet, the answer is yes, IMO,
> the quietest available, they have no equal in that department. Of
> course, the Seagates don't usually come out on top in performance
> either, for this very reason, all that fluid that dampens noise, also
> slows the mechanics slightly, but they do tend to come out in the
> middle of the pack, not awful, just average. But if noise reduction
> is vital, the Seagates are DEAD SILENT. If you want a little more
> performance, the WD or Maxtor are a little faster, but slightly
> noisier (not a lot, but not deal silent either). Lastly, nothing
> beats the WD Raptors for pure "speed", and although I've not heard
> them myself, I suspect they are noiser, they are certainly known to
> run "hotter".
>
>
>> L Purely theoretical this - could you in fact run RAID levels 0 +
>> 1 simultaneously on three drives, using a single main HDD for
>> everything which is both striped and mirrored? Or would that then
>> automatically require four drives?
>>
>
>
> In theory, yes, but it wouldn't make sense in practical terms. You
> need two HDs to benefit from RAID0 (stripping) performance, right?
> Let's say you only want to add a third HD for mirroring. At first,
> this seems plausible. Problem is, since the third *standalone* HD is
> *slower* than the RAID0 array, it negates the effects of the RAID0
> array!!! IOW, the mirroring HD (RAID1) must "keep up" w/ the RAID0
> if you don't want to slow the RAID0 array down to standalone speed.
> In such an arrangement, the RAID0 array would complete a write in say
> 10ms, but would then have to "wait" for the standalone drive to
> complete the mirrored write (maybe 14ms), not good. The correct
> solution is to have 4 HDs, so that the mirrored *pair* are *also*
> running RAID0! Of course, this is why having all the HDs be
> IDENTICAL makes sense, you don't want any single pokey HD slowing
> down the process.
>
>
>> Finally: L Any reputable CD RW and DVD RW will work comfortably
>> together each sitting on the remaining two ADA interfaces.
>>
>
>
> PATA interfaces? Yes, any standard IDE mobo interface will support
> your optical drives, that's pretty standard stuff. FYI, eventually,
> of course, future optical drives will be SATA too, and SATA will
> support all kinds of devices. That's neither here or there right
> now, just to be complete.
>
> HTH
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>> All comments most gratefully received, particularly on anything
>> obvious I have overlooked.
>>
>> I've already learnt lots from lurking. And for that too, many
>> thanks.
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Keep in mind that if you will being using the SATA controller and wish
to use the PATA controllers as well, you may or may not be able to use
disk imaging utilities on your SATA disks, such as Partition Magic,
Norton Ghost, and I know for a fact that Acronis True Image does not
support the integrated ICH5/ICH5R SATA controller.

The solution is to put the SATA controller in "legacy mode", but there a
several limitations. Don't remember all the details, but I believe you
will not be able to use the PATA controllers in legacy mode, or if not
that, you lose the first channel.

K G Wood wrote:

> Hi all. I'm a total novice. Until now frustrated by unreliable and
> rapidly out-of-date PCs and without the knowledge to cope with
> disasters, I have decided to "build my own" using reputable
> manufacturers with good back-up service; starting small with
> potential to enlarge; building in a degree of future-proofing and
> learning all about it on the way. I'm still at the design stage and
> have (pretty well) decided on a mobo, an Intel D875PBZ.
>
> First problem: The above mobo has 2 Serial ATA IDE interfaces with
> RAID 0 and RAID 1 support. And also 2 Parallel ATA IDE interfaces
> with UDMA 33, ATA-66/100 support.
>
> Am I thinking correctly here? (apologies if the vocab is
> inappropriate!):
>
> A These 4 interfaces will altogether ultimately support up to 8
> devices. B The SATA interfaces with increased bandwidth will be
> best as the primary supporting the HDDs. C ATA interfaces require
> 80 conductor cable and devices using the Cable Select position.. D
> SATA interfaces require the new thin flexible cable and also use
> Cable Select.. E It would in theory be possible to use the new
> flexible cable for all 4 interfaces and all 8 devices.
>
> F I can use one SATA interface solely for the OS and other
> software progs, and the second SATA for personal stuff. If so, would
> this involve changed settings in BIOS and how? G RAID 0 support
> with an extra HDD on each SATA interface (4 HDDs in all) would enable
> striping and improve performance. H Alternatively RAID 1
> support with an extra HDD on each SATA interface (4 HDDs in all)
> would enable mirroring and improve security. I It would NOT be
> possible to RAID 0 the OS HDD interface and at the same time RAID 1
> the other interface (or variations thereon: single OS/progs drive but
> mirrored personal drive for backup security) or would it? If so,
> how? J Until I acquire 4 drives, RAID can be turned off (or is
> simply ineffective) and I can have 1 SATA drive on each interface. K
> With RAID on or off, suitable quiet SATA HDDs would be 80GB Seagate
> Barracuda 7200s. L Purely theoretical this - could you in fact run
> RAID levels 0 + 1 simultaneously on three drives, using a single main
> HDD for everything which is both striped and mirrored? Or would
> that then automatically require four drives?
>
> Finally: L Any reputable CD RW and DVD RW will work comfortably
> together each sitting on the remaining two ADA interfaces.
>
> All comments most gratefully received, particularly on anything
> obvious I have overlooked.
>
> I've already learnt lots from lurking. And for that too, many
> thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
>