10,000rpm or RAID 2x 7200rpm?

phantom93

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2007
353
0
18,780
Should i buy the Rapter X with 150gb or, buy another ( i already have one) 7200 barracuda and hook it up to RAID O configuration. Which would get me a better boost?

Heres the Rapter x btw
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136011

and this is my HDD
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148230

Mine is slightly diffrent, this one has 7200.10 RPM and mine is .7, plus the serial number is diff but otherwise idont think it will matter. Anyways tell me what u think, 2 of the Barracudas or the Rapter x?
 
Go with the Raptor if you want raw speed and get the Seagate if you want storage. You will notice a speed difference in either option, but the Raptor is safer because you can back up files on that drive easily than a RAID.
 

phantom93

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2007
353
0
18,780
well, i thought about raid because my Case has a special adept to raid, it has a rack for 4 HDD's with a 120mm fan sucking air over them. And i kidn of wanted to use it, but will the rapter give me a speed boost over all better then 2x 7200s?
 

rubix_1011

Contributing Writer
Moderator
Depending on how you configure the drives (supposing you use the RAID controller on your motherboard) setting up in a RAID0 (performance stripe, no parity) with 2 7200rpm drives (anymore, they are 8-32mb cache) will almost always out perform one Raptor. The read/writes are transferred over both controllers and thus, both drives to speed up your system. Now, if you set up a RAID1 (mirror) for data redundancy, then yes, the Raptor would outperform it, but you would have drive redundancy with RAID1. Raptors are great if you have the cash to burn, but you can get somewhat better performance from 2 7200 SATA drivers in RAID0 and much more drive space in turn. Its up to you...
 

phantom93

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2007
353
0
18,780
2 7200 sounds good to me, and i mean boost like. If im loadign something such as a level in battlefield 2 It will be done in like 10sec rather 45-1min
 

rubix_1011

Contributing Writer
Moderator
Hardware-wise, yes, it might help a little...but is most likely limited by your processor and RAM as well.

The only way to make time pass more quickly while loading a BF2 map is to either utilize a time portal to project yourself several minutes into the future (provided you didn't change any video settings to warrant the otherwise 3 hours worth of texture rehashing/loading) or to go get ice cream in the mean time.

Or there is porn.

On your other machine.

 

phantom93

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2007
353
0
18,780
nah my CPu and ram and everythign ic heck, the HDD is holdign it back in loading times and windows boot. specs below

E6750 2.66ghz
AMPx DDR2 800 2048mb
nvidia 8800GT 512mb oc'ed at 660/1650/1000
Smildon RAIDMAX case with 1x 120mm 4x 80mm
MSI P35-NEO mobo
Seagate 7200.7 160gb HDD

so im gona get another 72 and hook up RAID 0. Take advatage of my RAID coolign rack i nthe case then
 

foofighters

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2004
42
0
18,530
Remember with a Raid 0 config, you double your chances of a faulty drive and thus data loss. That is not even taking into account the chances of breaking your array due to board failure or similar. It is very possible to recover data from a failed array, but it is a pain in the backside. :kaola:

Raid is great in the right uses, but I see too many people using it without knowing the drawbacks. If you have important data, make sure you back it up away from the array.
 

phantom93

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2007
353
0
18,780
i know the disadvantages and advantages. I dont have any important data that i put on my Gaming PC. This would just be for pure speed boost.
 

kcrush

Distinguished
Oct 18, 2004
111
0
18,680
I just built a friends computer for Christmas similar to your setup, I went with a Raptor X. I went from power on to usable in 15 seconds in XP.
 

foofighters

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2004
42
0
18,530


Great. Raid 0 will be a good solution for you. Good luck with it.