Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

RAID or Raptor

Last response: in Storage
Share
September 19, 2006 12:17:52 AM

Hey all,

I currently have a Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD2500KS 250GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive. I'm running out of space and was wondering if I should get another one for a RAID 1 setup or if I should get a raptor. What would be the performance difference???

Obvouisly there is a price and size difference but I was hoping for a performance comparison, since I haven't seen one on the net.

Thanks.

More about : raid raptor

September 19, 2006 12:41:29 AM

I would suggest just getting another 250GB drive instead of the Raptor. I think you would be happier that way and the price of the Raptor is still just too expensive. if you want for just $20 more than the Raptor you could get your 250GB drive and Two of these in RAID 0 and you would have close to Raptor RAID speed but also the backup with your two 250GB's in RAID 1
September 19, 2006 1:07:17 AM

Your question is kind of confusing, RAID 1 won't give you more space, R1 is mirroring for redundancy. Why not get a cheap external HD and back up and clean off your primary drive? Using a Raptor for your boot drive and Programs and the 250 just for storage might be a good idea but would require you to install your OS and Programs to a new drive - you probably won't notice much difference unless you're running a lot of Photoshop or a database on the machine.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
September 19, 2006 1:09:16 AM

Quote:
I'm running out of space and was wondering if I should get another one for a RAID 1 setup


RAID 1 won't help you on space, since everything on the first drive is mirrored to the second drive. Additionally, RAID 1 won't help you on speed either, and may decrease your write speed a bit, depending on the controller you use.

If it were me, I'd just buy an extra 250GB and be happy without all of this RAID discussion. The entire RAID "push" is a bit much in my book. It seems like everyone thinks RAID is the end-all solution to backups and speed.
September 19, 2006 1:10:39 AM

Quote:
database on the machine.


Personally, I would use quite a few more drives than two if I planned on running a good database machine. :) 
September 19, 2006 1:20:52 AM

Quote:
The entire RAID "push" is a bit much in my book. It seems like everyone thinks RAID is the end-all solution to backups and speed.


The RAID "push" isn't a bit much in the business world, it has been used effectively for years to gain speed, make larger single volumes and protect data. Maybe its merits are questionable for the average home user or gamer but I would not build a serious server without it.
September 19, 2006 1:45:01 AM

raid 0 can be seen as a questionable improvement for the average user, as to whether its actually worth it or not to have consistantly higher average throughput performance, or not... ...your random access times wont improve, your gameplay frame rates wont be any faster so to speak (aside from your pagefile accessing)... but for the average user, and even gamer... its nice not to have consistant delays in waiting for things to load (even if they are negligable delays)...

...if a user is impatient in waiting for smaller files to load (and certainly larger files)... having raid 0 does help to alleviate that... ...similar to having gpus running in parallel, even if it is only loosely similar...

...it can also be likened to running a dual core cpu under everyday usage, dont expect tremendous performance jumps browsing online and such, but just know that things will run abit smoother overall on average
September 19, 2006 1:52:11 AM

Let's not forget that RAID 0 with no redundancy in theory doubles the chance of losing data if one drive fails - backup is still important!

Everyone should just go to RAID 10 with an online hot spare!!
September 19, 2006 1:56:03 AM

no doubt there... backing up is ALWAYS important... although, hypothetically drive failures are more likely, but in reality, the likelyhood a drive will fail in a 2 drive array, is just as likely as with a 100 drive array, or as with a single drive by itself... ...but yes, backing up vital data even semi regularly is essential, in raid or not

anyhow, yeah... i think im just agreeing with you
September 19, 2006 2:23:05 AM

Apologize for the gross oversight. Obviously I meant RAID 0. Sorry. But what would be better for windows boot and game performance???

Should I hold off for a good solid state drive or are those still unrealistic???
September 19, 2006 2:29:09 AM

Quote:
The RAID "push" isn't a bit much in the business world, it has been used effectively for years to gain speed, make larger single volumes and protect data. Maybe its merits are questionable for the average home user or gamer but I would not build a serious server without it.


Nobody said anything about a server here, and there really isn't a push in the server world as far as I'm concerned. If you have a server, you should have RAID. It's too cheap for any business to do without.

However, we're talking a single desktop.
September 19, 2006 2:54:03 AM

i would say to add the additional 7200rpm drive to make the raid 0 array, rather than a purchasing a raptor to operate by itself (raptors are expensive anyhow, yet fairly reliable in comparison to most standard consumer hdds)...

raptors have very low access times compared to standard 7200rpm drives, (7-8ms for the raptor compared to 16-17ms for a standard 7200rpm), though throughput performance is roughly comparable...

but, again... its advisable to have at least something else to back your data up onto regularly... an external hdd, seperate internal hdd, or blank cd/dvds possibly

as far as holding off... dont, if you need something now, no point in waiting, especially for something that isnt readily available... like people waiting for dx10 gpus, or the next amd cpu
!