Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which HDD do you suggest? and what set-up?

Last response: in Storage
Share
February 7, 2008 3:21:55 AM

I am doing my first ever build, going with Q6600 and a 8800GT on a GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 Rev. 2.0 LGA 775 Intel P35 ATX Ultra Durable II Intel Motherboard


But I have NO IDEA what to pick with HDD? and don't know much about raid and sata?? *(is it??)

I do run a small business with my cpu and so data back up is important.

I will be running Vista Ultimate and I do some gaming but mostly WoW or other RPG

I also have a Gigabit Network set-up and plan to get a 2TB Raid setup Networkable HDD
back up and store most our Media files and possibly my company doc's as well

I was thinking of getting a Western Digital Raptor WD1500ADFD 150GB 10,000 RPM Serial ATA150 Hard Drive - OEM
To store the Vista - maybe more? I don't know? Should I ??

And then something like this
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 ST3500320AS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
For everything else?
Is this smart or dumb,

I also though of just getting to Seagates and running them in Raid0, then
Setting up the Network HDD to do a regular back up of my CPU.

Of course I will still use the network HDD for storing my Media.

PLEASE HELP? I really don't have a clue what is the best way to go.

Thanks

More about : hdd suggest set

February 7, 2008 4:13:26 AM

Forget the Raptor.
The Seagate 7200.11's beat it in all but one server benchmark and the -smallest- 500GB unit can be found via email sales discount for as little as $89 USD.

For under the price of -one- 150GB Raptor you can have -two- faster 500GB drives.

If you value your company data then -avoid- raid 0.
As a gamer I will never again use raid 0 myself.

Also most company computers have no need at all for such a high enfd GFX card...look at a $40-80 USD MB with built in GFX for that function and build another for games.
Use XP and stay away from Vista and it's DRM.
TigerDirect was saleing XP w/SP2 built in for $89 USD.

Althought I build and own a builders copy of XP (2 disks) that I got 6-7 years ago I orderd a copy from Tiger which UPS should have in my hands this Friday.
All new builds with this will not need a SP update to get drives larger than 160GB to be fully used on a fresh install.
a b G Storage
February 7, 2008 4:51:43 AM

I agree with ZOldDude. A high-end GPU has no affect on such programs as Office, Quickbooks, ACT, etc. If anything, all you would need is a 8400GS for the office system, and then build a separate gaming rig. I wouldn't mix business and pleasure on the same system.
Related resources
February 7, 2008 5:17:34 AM

Agreed a third time. This is from my 500gb 7200.11

One of these drives is all you need. I have used RAID 0 in the past and it does improve responsiveness but unless your using RAID 1, 1+0, or 0+1 it's too risky for a system with valuable information.
February 7, 2008 6:16:25 AM

Well my office is in my home and I don't have a large home. i don't know if I could actually fit 2 pc's even.

Is there any real reason why I can't use my gaming pc for my office doc's as well. Please remember as of now, my only real game is WoW.

In my business of home theater and automation. Media Center and home theater PC's are getting to be really popular, so I want to step up to vista ultimate with media center and start learning as much as possbile.

There are home automation system such as lifeware, that is completely built off of Media Center. But can't i get Media Center without going to VIsta?

As for the HDD I totally agree, The Seagate looks like the way to go!
February 7, 2008 6:42:13 AM

coryburgess said:

Is there any real reason why I can't use my gaming pc for my office doc's as well. Please remember as of now, my only real game is WoW.


If I could get a tax write-off to get a decent gaming machine I'd be there like a shot. :sol: 

In case you aren't sure: RAID 0 = very fast no redundancy, RAID 1 = "normal" speed and full redundancy.

Data backup SHOULD mean making a separate copy of your files to another media (tape, DVD, NAS, etc.).

coryburgess said:

I also have a Gigabit Network set-up and plan to get a 2TB Raid setup Networkable HDD
back up and store most our Media files and possibly my company doc's as well


If this is a second copy fine - please remember that RAID 1 will save you from hardware failure but not from human error (deleted files).

coryburgess said:
Of course I will still use the network HDD for storing my Media.


You MAY have an issue with performance here if you are planning to transcode across the network - but I can't be sure.

For my 5c

I agree with ZOldDude on the Seagates, put two small ones in in RAID 1 for your OS and applications.
Create a 5Gb partition on that drive for your swap file.
Put in a second pair of large RAID 1 Seagates as your "working" disk.
February 7, 2008 8:01:52 AM

Okay - so are u suggesting that I have 4 HDD total

2- small seagate drives in Raid 1 (for data back-up) for the OS
HOW SMALL???
and you said to create 5Gb partition for "swap files"
What do you mean by this? what are "swap files"?


Then you say get 2 more large Seagates, like 250 - 500Gb
put them also in Raid 1 - use them for all my programs and docs

Is this what you mean????

Would it be beneficial to create a partition just for my "Company Docs"?

Thanks again, this is a lot of help.

OH and, do i have to get extra hardware or parts to set-up a Raid1 config?
February 7, 2008 8:40:22 AM

coryburgess said:
Okay - so are u suggesting that I have 4 HDD total

2- small seagate drives in Raid 1 (for data back-up) for the OS
HOW SMALL???


Yes I am.

I would do as follows:

first = 2 X 80Gb in RAID 1
second = 2 X 750Gb in RAID 1

I would then partition the first drive to be:
C drive of 75Gb
D drive of 5Gb

the second drive would then become my E drive. There could be an argument to split it into more than one partition from an organisational perspective. Given that not everybody will agree with my option (now there's a surprise :ange:  ) I'm sure there will be some different opinions.

coryburgess said:
What do you mean by this? what are "swap files"?


From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paging

In computer operating systems that have their main memory divided into pages, paging (sometimes called swapping) is a transfer of pages between main memory and an auxiliary store, such as hard disk drive.[1] Paging is an important part of virtual memory implementation in most contemporary general-purpose operating systems, allowing them to easily use disk storage for data that does not fit into physical RAM. Paging is usually implemented as a task built into the kernel of the operating system.

Since Windows is constantly reading and writing from this file it makes sense to have the file stored as efficiently as possible. By having your paging file as the only file on that partition (D drive) you remove the possibility of fragmenting the paging file.

Remember you'll need to change the default Windows setting to more your swap file.

coryburgess said:
put them also in Raid 1 - use them for all my programs and docs
Is this what you mean????


I would install the O/S and programs on the C drive as normal. I'm thinking that you would use the E drive for media files, converting formats, building DVD images, temp folder, etc. You could store your docs on either the C or E drive.


coryburgess said:
OH and, do i have to get extra hardware or parts to set-up a Raid1 config?


No your motherboard supports RAID. The Gigabyte documentation is normally pretty good. If you can build your PC you can install RAID (99.999% of the time :D  ).
February 7, 2008 4:15:15 PM

Like everybody is saying about the Seagate new drives the amount of drives and Raid 1. It's all good.

How ever having done numerous counts of different setups, testing and contradiction like this guys/gals are, here’s how I came out with my best set up.

4 to 5 HD is needed.

HD #1 for Application
Partition A: OS
Partition B: Office Programs and Games
Partition C: Page file
Partition D: Scratch Files
Partition E: If separate partition is needed for Games instead of using Partition B.

HD # 2 Cloned of HD # 1, NOT in RAID 1
Partition A: OS
Partition B: Office Programs and Games
Partition C: Page file
Partition D: Scratch Files
Partition E: If separate partition is needed for Games instead of using Partition B.

So you can use the one HARD DRIVE for Office Application and one HARDDRIVE for GAMING. Or just save the one HD, for my reason for not going for RAID 1 for PROGRAMS APPLICATION is; if for any situation your applications or/and your controller fails, then you can always bring your system on line with a lot less hassle since you have the other one that can do the same task.. Having only to go to the BIOS and change the priority of the drives for booting. But this is only because the system is also use for business and avoiding failure to a minimum is higher priority.

5 Gig Partition C for Page File additions to the page file from Partition A.
To add more: CLICK START > RIGHT CLICK MY COMPUTER > CLICK PROPERTIES > CLICK ADVANCED > PERFORMANCE SETTINGS > CLICK ADVANCED > CLICK CHANGE > CLICK Partition C and SELECT Custom Size >Then enter the amount of size leaving only 90 to 100 Meg of space or LOW DISC SPACE will popup constantly. > CLICK OK but don’t restart yet.
The go to SYSTEM RESTORE > CLICK where the Partition C is > CLICK SETTINGS > then Check box: Turn off system restore on this drive. CLICK OK then Restart.

HD # 3 for Data Storage on RAID 1
PARTITION THE RAID DRIVE TO YOUR NEEDS.
With that amount of space it’s better to have them in smaller partitions, it’s easier to format and maintained.

HD # 4 Backup files, if you’re neurotic about protecting your Data.

NOTE: The partition sizes differ on applications needed to be installed, so size up accordingly.

I won't argue that RAID 1 is better but having to fix less is better than any RAID setup especially for business applications.

PS. This concept is created with Windows XP in mind. Vista has better processing technology so I would say the setup may work differently. (Since I have not tried Vista and 'am in a process of swicthing Vista for one of my computer at home) But the Idea is the same.
February 7, 2008 4:47:22 PM

What is the benefit of having HD1 & HD2 be exactly the same, but not in Raid format? How would I clone them?

What are "scratch" files?

So I would use HD1 for OS, partition for "swap files" And partition for programs and possible partition for games


Then you are suggesting have HD3 & 4 set-up in Raid1 and use it store all my files, media, docs, etc -

This seems good b/c the Raid conifg is really only for protecting my files, docs, media etc.

Is there any reason why I would want a back-up of all the programs and OS, .........well I guess if it crashed I wouldn't have to reload everything.

Thanks again for the help
February 7, 2008 5:36:41 PM

Use RAID1 or solutions with better redundancy, like RAID5, and set block size to 16kbytes and ntfs block size to 8kbytes or something bigger (2:1 proportional) if you have big files. that's why it's recommended to have different partitions for different kind of data
February 7, 2008 6:24:06 PM

"Forget the Raptor.
The Seagate 7200.11's beat it in all but one server benchmark and the -smallest- 500GB unit can be found via email sales discount for as little as $89 USD."

You get what you pay for, and there is considerable evidence that the Raptor series will outlast most other drives by at least 2 to 1. There is a lot of misinformation on these lists, and it pays to do a little research before blindly believing what you hear. The fact is that the Raptor drives have access times that are 50 to 70% faster than the average 7,200 rpm drive. If you are doing one thing all the time, by all means go for the cheap drives. On the other hand if booting Windows, and accessing many items quickly is important the Raptor will make most drives feel like a dial up connection compared to broadband. Raid 0 will not improve access times. A pair of Raptors in Raid 0 is the fastest most reliable option available... period! You can always add an extra cheap jumbo storage drive for archived data.
February 7, 2008 8:45:42 PM

coryburgess said:
What is the benefit of having HD1 & HD2 be exactly the same, but not in Raid format? How would I clone them?
Here’s a few:
Symantec - Partition Magic now called Norton Ghost
Farstone - DriveClone
Acronis - True Image

coryburgess said:
What are "scratch" files?
Quick look at the net. And ( http://search.live.com/results.aspx?srch=105&FORM=IE7RE... )

Temporary computer file: a temporary computer file created in a memory device as a work area or for use when executing a program.

But also you can use the space of that partion for your temporary working files. Temporary video files or audio files while working on adobe programs or Microsoft/Corel ect. for that matter.

coryburgess said:
Is there any reason why I would want a back-up of all the programs and OS, .........well I guess if it crashed I wouldn't have to reload everything.
- Exactly.
February 7, 2008 9:30:59 PM

1 External eSATA enclosure w/ Raid card $250
4 500GB HD Raid 5 $360 1.3Tb total disk space for work stuff
1 Additional HD for the $90
Partition the raid however you like for organization there will be no performance benefit. RAID 1 is slow and a very low budget approach. You still need a back-up solution.

8800GT or 3870 WoW is quite taxing when maxed. In shat my my 8800 GTX drops to mid 30 maxed at 1600x1200 and yes it noticibly choppy
a c 174 G Storage
February 7, 2008 10:19:51 PM

Educate yourself on the benefits and pitfalls of RAID of any kind. For a good tutorial go here: http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/rai... That web site has lots of expertise on hard drives; go there for good hard drive info.

My summary conclusion is that RAID of any type is not a very good thing for the single user desktop machine.

RAID-1 and some others will speed up recovery time for a failed hard drive. Recovery is almost instantaneous. Can you afford a hour to recover data if a hard drive fails? The mean time to failure of a typical hard drive is on the order of 1 million hours; that is about 100 years. For your critical data, you MUST have external backup. If the data is connected to the PC, then it is still vulnerable to Viruses, Electrical overload, and human error. A lan connected device is convenient, but is vulnerable. If data is backed up to any device, you are only safe if it is disconnected. Even then, what about fire in the pc room? Get a little paranoid and think of how to protect your vital data from these possibilities.

Raid-0 and some others have speed benefits in some special environments. In synthetic data transfer benchmarks they look wonderful. The problem is that the real world application environment is not like the benchmark, and the benefits evaporate. As a rule, there is no real benefit to RAID-0. Only if you have a very specific type of sequential process can you get real benefits. Even then, you can do better using one drive as input, and the other as output.

How much data will you have on the PC?

My suggestion is to keep it simple.

Get a raptor150 for the os and start filling it up. You will pay an extra $100 for the raptor, so if the speed is not worth it to you, then go with something cheaper. When it is full, get a second cheaper slower 7200rpm drive and so on... Don't bother with partitioning. The benefits are miniscule.

Vista media center is really slick and easy to use; learn about it.

---good luck

February 7, 2008 10:44:26 PM

"The mean time to failure of a typical hard drive is on the order of 1 million hours; that is about 100 years."

I agree with your feelings on Raid, but strongly disagree with the statement above. I have a large box with dozens of dead HDs I have collected over the years. Manufacturer ratings are highly optimistic.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6404
http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=38693
I manage a large data center, and we replace drives on a weekly, and sometimes daily basis. Most of these are 15,000 rpm drives that see extreme duty and run 24x7. We have over 500 servers, and over 3000 hard drives. The main killer of most drives is heat, and on/off cycles.
Beyond that the largest factors are component and quality. For overall speed and reliability you would be very hard pressed to beat the WD Raptor series.
a c 174 G Storage
February 7, 2008 11:07:43 PM

@vtr99:

The study you referenced was educational, and corresponds to your real-world experience --thanks. They indicated that age over 5-7 years was the primary cause of failure.

You indicated that heat was a big issue, also. Would you care to estimate what heat level or drive temperature seems to be dangerous?

What is the typical home user to do?

1) Plan on replacing the drives in 5-7 years. I would probably do this anyway. SSD's are on the way.
2) Keep the case as cool as possible. I do this.
3) Don't turn off the drives? Would this be a good idea? It could be done.
4) Review the S.M.A.R.T data for signs of impending failure. What should I look for?

Do you have any experience with 7200rpm sata drives from a reliability point of view?
February 8, 2008 12:12:10 AM

"You indicated that heat was a big issue, also. Would you care to estimate what heat level or drive temperature seems to be dangerous?"

Sure... I lost 2 Seagate 320gb drives last summer within a week of each other. Both drives were about a year old. After the first drive failed I didn't think much about it other than being upset over the loss of data. I did notice my drives were running hot (about 63C. I have a full tower for my main box, but it is an older IN-WIN 500 that has dual PSU bays. I use the second for my main water cooling radiator. Anyway the front does not have the best air flow, although I do run 2 slimline 90mm fans. My home office also has 3 systems that create a lot of heat, not to mention my 50" plasma that uses 535 watts. About a week later the second drive failed. Again I noticed my 2 surviving Raptors were pretty hot to the touch. At this point I opened up the front of the case, and added 2 120mm fans. The temp immediately dropped into the 40s. You may remember we had a very hot summer last year, and my systems are on the second floor in a room with less than ideal cooling. In my opinion, you need to keep the surface temp of the drive below 50c. My system again has 4 hard drives, and as you know hard drives create quite a bit of heat. I have had plenty of drives fail in the past, and in my opinion the average 7,200 rpm bargain drive is far less reliable than the Raptor series. My original 74gb drives are still running strong after nearly 5 years under the same conditions. I always shut my systems down when not using them, as keeping them spun up uses a lot of juice. My best recommendation is to keep them cool. If the drive is hot to the touch, it's too hot.
a c 115 G Storage
February 8, 2008 12:26:34 AM

First I'd suggest reading the Hard Drive section of the forum. These issues have been covered in detail several times in the last few days alone. You'll see many Chevy is better, Dodge is better, Ford is better type arguments but many posts include significant sources to support their opinions and the weight you apply to each post should be judged accordingly. First question I'd ask is about your "small business". Is it just you ? Does your wife have a machine and will be helping you ? Will you have a 2nd machine for yaself ? A laptop ? Any employees ?

In SoHo shops < 10 puters, it's hard to beat an NAS for data storage of critical files. It makes one hell of a fine media server also. Right now, IMO, the two most attractive options come from Netgear who grabbed the technology when they bought Infrant this past summer.

1. Four Drive (X-RAID) Unit - Start out with two drives and add up to two additional later. RAID 1 provides protection from a failed drive and the unit comes with network backup software and 5 client licenses with a 5 year warranty. Great Forum support. Netgear NV+ will cost ya $999 w/ two Seagate 500 GB drives.

http://www.netgear.com/Products/Storage/ReadyNASNVPlus....

2. Two Drive (X-RAID) Unit - Start out with one drive and add the second when you're ready. X-RAID gives you hot swap capability and the ability to auto rebuild the array without data loss even when you add drives that aren't the same size. Expected to arrive in stores later this month at a cost of about $450 w/ 1 drive.

Both have built in media (iTunes) server)

Now if you just starting out as a 1 box shop, the NAS options might be a bit premature. But the Raptor is yesterday's performance HD. The Samsung F1, Hitachi 7k and Seagate 7200.1 all have bounced it off its perch.
Here's some TomsHardware review comments taken from another thread here on the forum. Again, you will get a great deal of info just reading the various forum posts as you will find many others with similar issues that have already been addressed.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/1 [...] page9.html

Hitachi and Seagate battle head to head when it comes to winning the heart of the enthusiast who wants as much performance as possible. The Deskstar 7K1000 still does okay in the access time and I/O performance tests, but it loses ground when it comes to transfer rates. The Barracuda 7200.11 offers the best low-level benchmark results, jumping over 100 MB/s read or write transfer rates and accessing data in an average of 12.7 ms. With the exception of access time and I/O benchmarks, it also clearly beats Western Digital's 10,000 RPM Raptor, and sets the new standard for desktop hard drives. (It's about time for Western Digital to come up with a new Raptor drive. Based on current technology, it should be able to regain everything that has been lost to Seagate right now.)

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/1 [...] page7.html

The WD5000AAKS is a Caviar SE16 drive with 16 MB cache, Serial ATA/300 and a 7,200 RPM spindle speed. Though it cannot compete with the latest hard drive generation (Samsung Spinpoint F1 or Seagate Barracuda 7200.11), it is a solid performer and a reliable workhorse. Thanks to its under $120 price tag, this model offers an exceptional price/performance value.

The 7200.11 is $119 ....th WD5000AAKS is now discounted down to $104

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/1 [...] age11.html

[The F1] beat Hitachi, Seagate and Western Digital when it comes to performance. Hitachi and Seagate still offer better access times, which is why Samsung does not dominate the I/O benchmarks, but only the Barracuda 7200.11's access time is noticeably quicker. The maximum throughput of 118 MB/s is up to 18% faster than Seagate's 100 MB/s maximum, and the average and minimum throughput when reading and writing also dominate the benchmark results. When compared to WD's Caviar GP, the new Spinpoint F1 by Samsung offers roughly a third more throughput, which is very respectable."

Now let's look at the reliability comments covering past performance reliability of each vendor's offerings. Here's some data pulled from another thread on reliability:

"According to filtered and analyzed data collected from participating StorageReview.com readers, a predecessor of the Seagate Cheetah 15K.5, the Seagate Cheetah 15K.3 , is more reliable than 100% of the other drives in the survey that meet a certain minimum floor of participation.

According to filtered and analyzed data collected from participating StorageReview.com readers, a predecessor of the Seagate Barracuda 7200.9, the Seagate Barracuda 7200.8 , is more reliable than 49% of the other drives in the survey that meet a certain minimum floor of participation.

According to filtered and analyzed data collected from participating StorageReview.com readers, the Western Digital Raptor WD1500 is more reliable than 12% of the other drives in the survey that meet a certain minimum floor of participation."

Just using those two as an example (reliability data BTW is from storagereview.com) , the reliability of the Seagate models is between 4 and 8 times that of the Raptor. If ya want another take on reliability, look at what HD's the high end NAS vendors are supplying in their NAS's.

MTBF is a meaningless statistic not meant to suggest that a HD has any chance of lasting 100 years. If you have 5 machines in your office, it's a pretty safe bet that 1 or 2 will fail before the warranty period ends. I have a P2P server here serving a small SOHO and I have replaced it's hard drives (under warranty) twice. They have 5 year warrantees BTW. I have built 68 boxes and replaced HD's on at least half of them before they got retired....and we don't keep machines even for print server duty after 4-5 years at most. Temperature plays a large role in HD life. IBM's white paper showed that a mere 10 degree temperature increase cut HD life in half. All of our boxes are built here, stuffed with as many fans as the case will fit and all have HD coolers or are mounted in vented cages with fans blowing thru them.

If money is tight, I'd just build a box with one HD. I'd make it a Samsung F1 or Seagate 7200.11

I'd partition it as follows (BootIt NG is free for 30 daya BTW):

1. C:\ OS and OS utilities - Not sure what I'd do for Vista as yet I have never considered it for a build. Still looking for a reason to look away from it's "anything you can do, I can do slower" singsong. Until hybrid drives start approaching the performance of non hybrid drives, it lacks a reason to consider unless you must have Aero or play Halo 3. But if it was XP, I'd make a NTFS partition of 16 GB size and throw the OS on it, OS utilities like backup program and partitioning utility and that's it.

2. D:\ Page file and temp file partition - I make these 8 gigs and FAT32 since we don't need the file protections offered by NTFS, we might as well free ourselves from it's overhead. Other threads explain how to do this. Your Seagate / Samsung HD can rip data off at about 100 MB'sec here......this will be the most used portion of ya HD. Ya can have it at the outside of ya drive (100 MB/sec) or at the inside (60 MB/s). Since 100 is a lot bigger than 60, me choosie outside.

3. E:\ ..... etc - OK at this point what is more important to ya.....where do ya need ya speed. Obviously I'm talking games or programs. From this point on it's pretty personal....do what works for you. Consider a partition for a "maintenance copy" of your OS. Consider a partition for backups. Consider a partition for media files. Pick the number of cabinets (partitions) ya want and then arrange them from fastest to slowest needs. The stuff ya want to go fast gets the lower letters (outside of the HD platters), the stuff ya don't mind going slow, gets the inside (higher letters).

If you want to go a step further.....a 2nd drive is the next step.....If you built the box as above and are coming back later to add that second drive, it is very easy. Let's say you went partition wild on ya original build and had:

C:\OS
D:\ Swap & temp files
E:\Programs
F:\Games
G:\Office Data
H:\Personal Stuff
I:\Backups

At this point, I'd create a new swap / temp file drive at the front of the second drive. I'd rename old D to say M and then call that new swap drive D:\ From then on ya might wanna move things around but remember you can change letter designations.

But again, before messing with RAID, I'd build with just one drive and see how it performs.....if you or not waiting for anything nor running outta room, it's hard to justify messing with RAID or multiple drives.

When ya have some cashola available consider which NAS solution makes the most sense for your long term goals.

I am running a 9 box SOHO network....most of the boxes, including the laptops, have single 7200 rpm drives. We run AutoCAD, Photoshop, GoLive, and lotsa games and have no speed issues. We used to use all 15k SCSI drives on every single box but storage I/O is no longer the AutoCAD bottleneck it once was so we haven't been able to justify the additional cost. All office data (SO side of SOHO) is stored on various NAS volumes the NAS (Infrant NV+ w/ twin 500 GB Seagates). Another volume (for the HO side of SOHO) includes an iTunes and media server.

BTW, another thing to consider is warranty policies. What do you do when ya HD dies ? Will manufacturer cross ship w/ credit card or will they require you to get an RMA, ship in the old one, let them take up to 2 weeks to examine it, and then ... if they think it's defective...send you a new one....UPS ground....Can you wait 3 weeks to rebuild your machine ?

That's why I try and stick with vendors who will cross ship. It's also why I like NAS's as I can always access my data from any other box on the network....and even if I don't have a 2nd box, a borrowed laptop can easily get needed files.
February 8, 2008 12:38:36 AM

KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid)

SATA drives, as many as you like but at least two. OS + apps on one, data and paging file on other(s). Backup to external drives with Acronis True image or Runtime's free DriveImage. If your data is is important, external backup is the way to go, take it home with you every night - internal backups are lost in a fire, flood, etc.
February 8, 2008 12:43:53 AM

Get a 750GB with perpendicular recording technology and be done with it, RAID is a headache and only worth it for servers.
February 8, 2008 2:05:04 AM

nhobo said:
KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid)



ROTFL, who has time to read such a long post much less write it.
February 8, 2008 5:39:40 AM

WOW, WOW WOW< There is so much information I think my brain has doubled in size, whew.

Okay, So at this point, personal experience, I have a 6 year old PC with a 200GH WD hdd, I don't know what model.

It came from SONY partitioned into C & D drives, for the most part the OS and some other random files/programs are on the C.
I have been good about only using the D drive for anything I add, games, media, programs whatever.

I have NEVER had a problem.....ever.

BUT, now i have had this business for 5 years, officially almost 3. and I realize that I do my bookkeeping and store all my customer records here.

It is a home office, but I'm in the business of Designing and installing Home theater, home automation, Sound.
SO i don't have huge files.

I am getting new software that I will be using to design more system into CAD and microsoft visio.
So I will want to have this stuff backed up the easiest way possible.

Should I just do a quick file back up onto a DVD-R once a month and call it good???

I like the idea of a 74g Raptor to run my OS and swap files. Is 74G more than I need for this??

I also understand that the new Seagates are suppose to be very nice, So i'd likely get a 250-500G 7200.11
For storing all my data and running my programs,

I would probably partition into - #1 - games & programs, #2- Media, #3 - Business

Does this make sense????

I plan to have a networkable HDD, that I can just install iTunes on and have access from any off the PC's or laptops in the house. does this work??

ALSO, i am REALLY interested in utilizing and learning about Media Center.

DVD servers are a very very HOT item, and if I can come up with a cost effective alternative to some of these 30k players, i'd like to . ANY IDEAS HERE????


I Know this is a lot of questions, I really value everyones advice and difference in opinions.

Thanks again.

PS. if you have any Home A/V, distributed audio, lighting control , automation or HiFi 2ch. quesitons. Please message me, i'd be happy to help.





Quote:
happy_fanboy Get a 750GB with perpendicular recording technology and be done with it, RAID is a headache and only worth it for servers.


Okay
February 8, 2008 5:43:24 AM

OH yeahs, qhat is "perpendicular recording technolgy"????
February 8, 2008 1:32:36 PM

coryburgess said:


I also understand that the new Seagates are suppose to be very nice, So i'd likely get a 250-500G 7200.11



Just so you know the 7200.11 drives only come in 500, 750 and 1000gb anything smaller would be the older 7200.10.
a c 174 G Storage
February 8, 2008 3:58:19 PM

I presume that you are looking to build a PC to replace your current 6 year old machine. I like that idea because you get rid of the unknown "bloatware" that comes with pre-built pc's.

For your home office, your needs are simple.
Most likely, a single 150gb raptor would have enough capacity. If not, add a second storage drive.

34gb $100 is enough to hold the os with about half left over.
74gb $150
150gb 170 For the extra $20, why not.
Storage devices cost about $75 per 250gb, and come in sizes up to 1000gb.
Perpendicular recording is a hardware technique to increase the density and capacity of hard drives.

The value of partitioning the os drive is to ease the re-installation of the os without disturbing the old data. Any performance benefits of partitioning are negligible, and it might actually hurt performance. The negative is that if one partition is filling up, the space in other partitions is not available. Keep it simple, use only one partition per drive.
My take is to back up your critical data, which you should be doing anyway, and just restore it if you ever have to. A partition for a swap drive is not worth it with vista. Vista is designed to be able to use ram effectively, where XP was designed to conserve ram by swapping to a hard drive. The more ram vista gets, the better it runs. 4gb is cheap, these days, so why not get 8gb. Some of those cad programs can benefit from very large amounts of ram.

As to backup strategy:
It sounds like your critical data like customer files is not too large. Backing up to a DVD is good and simple. Remember that the data will be compressed, so that it won't take as much DVD capacity as the original files. Do this at whatever frequency is necessary. If lightning were to strike, and destroy your PC at the most inopportune time, How far back would you be OK with restoring your files? If you can recreate a day's worth of data relatively easily, then daile is a good frequency of backup. If a week is ok, then backup weekly...
For a anti virus and spyware program, I use microsoft ONECARE. It's simple and unobtrusive. It can do full and incremental backups on a schedule. You can even actually talk to a person if you have a problem. I had a couple of issues early on, and the reps in India were very competent and solved the problem. You do have to listen carefully because of the strange accent.

As to media center:

I use vista media center to watch tv on one display while I work on the other. It's quite slick.
In your business, It would be good to get some experience with it.
I would suggest that you invest in a separate development PC where you can try out some of the things your customers might want.
A dvd server stores dvd's on hard drives for later viewing, media center can do this. I can envision a service of creating media center pc's customized to the individual home theater owner's needs. Doing it yourself is the only way to get the requisite experience.
If your business pc should ever fail, your files could be restored to the development pc to keep you going.
February 8, 2008 6:53:55 PM

Okay, i'm starting to see a theme here & please correct me if I'm wrong

Keep it simple!

In general through good standard practice of creating back-up files saved on a hard copy really eliminates any need for raid conifg.

The raptors are very fast & reliable so might as well get 150G raptor - patition for OS, then rest for programs and files/docs

And really If i want to set up a network hdd for media, then there is no reason to beef up the HDD capacity in my PC.

I have a linksys WRT350N router that has the option to connect an external HDD via USB - making it a NAS without the price - with some limits.

Backing up media I do feel is smart - b/c re loading 200-500 CD' s and another 100+ DVD's is very, very time consuming. so much so, that business exist just to provide this service.
So perhaps just stick with the 150GB raptor for the PC - then go with a 1TB Raid external drive for media.

And I can't WAIT to get this new pc built, get VistA Ultimate on and start experimenting with Media Center - I plan to use my xbox360 connected to my home theater as the Extender off of my main office system.

a c 174 G Storage
February 8, 2008 8:52:17 PM

To be paranoid, what happens if the the 1tb external raid drive gets destroyed by: a fire, a malicious employee, a falling roof...?
Just use a regular 1tb external drive. On occasion, back it up to a second external drive, and take it home with you.

What happens if you set your OS partition too small, and it gets outgrown? You have a mess to fix it. What happens if it is much larger than you need? What did you gain by partitioning? I think it is simpler to just put all your stuff in one partition.

A USB connection is not particularly fast for a hard disk. It would work. I think there are external drives connected by gigabit lan which would be much faster. Your linksys should handle it.

February 8, 2008 9:20:36 PM

Okay, as for the exteranl hdd, the actuall NAS is the way to go then, my network here is all gigabit, which is much faster than the usb, for sure.

I see your point on the Seagate- I will most like just go wtih one Seagate 500, from the 7200.11 and call it good.

My office is actually in my home - My employees don't use or come here. I can't get too paranoid, b/c a fire could heppen and roof could fall, earthquake (i am in cali).

So the only true sure fire way is to do a regular back up of everything and keep it in a fire proof safe.

And as long as that is there - whether i actually get a safe or not, i don't know. BUt with a good external back up copy - like 1tb - there's no reason to mess with raid - RIGHT???

why buy 2 tb - put into Raid - when I could just spend a little time each week and back up everything on a single TB serperately, and use another TB for every day media.
a c 174 G Storage
February 8, 2008 9:48:42 PM

Exactly. The backup drive will not have to be as large as the source because data on it is usually compressed. Once you do your first backup, subsequent backups will be incremental, just adding changed data only.
February 9, 2008 10:09:51 AM

Raptor is nonsense unless you are making a server.

1 TB is cool if you have a budget. It performs almost as fast as the raptor 150GB but incredibly huge capacity for very huge files.

You may use external HDD with esata port. Which is the most fastest port for data transfer with 150GBit-300Gbit data transfer.

February 9, 2008 12:46:48 PM

"You could spend $100 on a 36gb Raptor or $120 on a 500gb 7200.11 and you'll be lucky to see a performance difference between the two. The choice is yours."

The big difference will be the failure rate... In my experience you will see 10 failures in the Seagate drive for every Raptor that fails. You also lose a lot more data with those big cheap drives.
February 11, 2008 6:48:42 AM

I have read some issues with some data loss on the 7200.11 - and some bad products in general. However there are far many more endorsements for the product.

I am a bit concerned - b/c it does use some technologies, where the Raptors have been tried & tested in great numbers with a lot of good feedback.

What if I got a 150GB raptor to run everything, but used a less expensive, like
Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600AAJS 160GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s
And us this to clone the main HDD.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

150G should be plenty, since my media (which seems to use up the most space on a HDD) will be stored externally
February 11, 2008 6:59:05 AM

Or just as a thought -

Could I get a 150 G raptor to run programs & Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD5000AAKS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM

ANd use the 2nd drive for media, files & docs.

THen get a 3rd - Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD7500AAKS 750GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Then use the 3rd DISC to CLONE the 1st & 2nd as well as any partitions that are made???? is that possible
February 11, 2008 7:17:35 AM

Hi cory,

coryburgess said:
Okay, i'm starting to see a theme here & please correct me if I'm wrong

Keep it simple!

In general through good standard practice of creating back-up files saved on a hard copy really eliminates any need for raid conifg.


There is some good advice in this thread, the problem is that it is varied and, as is the nature of these discussions, diverse. From your first post you said that backup is important. One thing that I need to "put on the table" is that you don't only have just one backup of your data. The minimum that is considered safe is to have three generations (child, parent, grandparent) of backup.

I would caution AGAINST cloning your disks as you can only ever keep one generation. I suggest the following as far as backups go:

Everyday backup your documents to another disk (schedule a Windows backup).
Once the external drive starts filling up (75%) start deleting old backups.
Once a month backup your documents to a DVD.

UD.
February 11, 2008 7:44:17 AM

This is what I do :

Get an external drive and from time to time copy your important data, pictures etc on this device. And you can use it anywhere and its so easy to switch pc's. You can also unplug it most of the time this saves energy and is safer against virusses, power spikes etc.

If your main drive fails get a new one and copy back.
If you external drive fails get a new one and copy :-)
This seems much simpler than raid1 because I read it was not that easy to recover raid1 or am I mistaking?

You already have a backup on cd or DVD of all the things like Windows, programmes, games etc. Patches and the rest are downloads.

This is what I'll get im my new rig (in a few weeks) :

A raptor (for the fastest access time).
I read a big review (forgot where) that said riad0 was worth it in this case, so I'm still deciding what to do (2 small raptors raid0 or 1 without raid).
One thing always seems to come back in my research : Raptors are not the fastest anymore for transferring big files but nothing with SATA can beat the access time (needed for a fast OS) and they are very robust.
And because of this low failure rate I'm thinking of risking raid0.
Keep 5 or 10 Gb (advice pls?) for swap as d:
The rest is for windows and programmes I'll use often like browsers, virusscanner, office etc.
One 7200.11 for data ( "my documents") and games.

Could anyone tell me how much space Vista needs?
February 11, 2008 7:49:44 AM

I forgot to ad this against raid1 as backup for a simple desktop: As I understand you need 2 identical drives for raid so if one fails in a few years you still need to find it or replace both.
February 11, 2008 8:00:13 AM

tjoepie said:
This seems much simpler than raid1 because I read it was not that easy to recover raid1 or am I mistaking?


I think you have not been correctly informed. RAID 1 can be taken off the array and connected to a normal controller (P/S-ATA) and all data will be available.

tjoepie said:
As I understand you need 2 identical drives for raid


Not true. It is recommended that both drives be the same. You will only be able to use the space of the smallest drive and the slowest drive will effect timings.

tjoepie said:
you still need to find it or replace both.


At least I haven't lost all my data or had to rebuild my PC. Drives are cheap - time isn't. Ask yourself how long it would take you to get your PC back to the state it's in now if your hard drive failed.

UD.
February 11, 2008 8:05:37 AM

AW - well i currently use an external drive for back up anyways.
So combine that with a regular routine of DVD-r back up.
Plus put the network drive on a nightly timer
AnD I should be set -

ONe thing that kills me - is big games like WOW that have so many patches and I have bought online - they take HOURS to download - how hard would it be to have a back-up of the programs and the OS.

I would love to just have one External HDD that was basically a clone of my PC - I have probably 10-15 progams MAX that I use all the time. anything else I wouldn't mind re loading -

I have a hard copy of the OS - but again its the damn patches/updates.

ITs wierd that i'm suddenly paranoid (sorta) after going 6 or 7 years and never having a single problem. This just puts me more in favor of WD cuz thats what i have.

I was really gonna go with the Seagates - but the only benefit was price/performance - nobody could really say much about reliability, where again the Raptros and 7200 16mb WD have been used and tested and praised by thousands of people. Seems a little cut in dry -
You get what you pay for.
February 11, 2008 8:18:17 AM

Hi cory,

coryburgess said:
One thing that kills me - is big games like WOW that have so many patches and I have bought on line - they take HOURS to download - how hard would it be to have a back-up of the programs and the OS.


Not very - that's why I suggest using Windows backup <--- not the best piece of software but it does the job. You can also backup the patches, most of the time the patches are cumulative so you'll only need the last one.

coryburgess said:

I would love to just have one External DD that was basically a clone of my PC - I have probably 10-15 progams MAX that I use all the time. anything else I wouldn't mind re loading -

I have a hard copy of the OS - but again its the damn patches/updates.


That will work. For my 5c I wouldn't only have one backup.

coryburgess said:
I have a hard copy of the OS - but again its the damn patches/updates.


I don't think there's too much you can do here - you can build a slipstream disk which will save sometime on a reload.

coryburgess said:
ITs wierd that i'm suddenly paranoid (sorta) after going 6 or 7 years and never having a single problem.


Older, wiser? ;) 

coryburgess said:
You get what you pay for.


UD.
a c 115 G Storage
February 11, 2008 9:57:56 PM

coryburgess said:

It is a home office, but I'm in the business of Designing and installing Home theater, home automation, Sound.
SO i don't have huge files.

I am getting new software that I will be using to design more system into CAD and microsoft visio.
So I will want to have this stuff backed up the easiest way possible.

Should I just do a quick file back up onto a DVD-R once a month and call it good???

I like the idea of a 74g Raptor to run my OS and swap files. Is 74G more than I need for this??

I also understand that the new Seagates are suppose to be very nice, So i'd likely get a 250-500G 7200.11
For storing all my data and running my programs,

I would probably partition into - #1 - games & programs, #2- Media, #3 - Business

Does this make sense????



I design buildings including hi end homes and including home automation, hi end audiophile systems. Current projects. CAD files and image files get huge, as do PDF's.

If you can afford to lose up to 29 days of data, then backing up once a month is fine.

If ya have two drives, best to have swap and OS on different ones. As for the #1 / #2 / # 3 order.....whatever ya want fastest is No. 1.....and so on.

In your situation, I'd go with one drive, then get the Netgear 2 drive NAS
February 11, 2008 10:42:18 PM

You guys are all making this more complicated than it need be...

Dude, get a dell! :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
February 11, 2008 11:10:58 PM

After reading some pretty dumb stuff here....here would be a few suggestions:

2 Hard Drives, Raid 1 mirror
3 Hard Drives, Raid 5 --Speed and Redundancy
4 Hard Drives, Raid 0+1 -- tad bit more speed, not noticeable and redudancy.

As far as partioning goes, don't get crazy with it. Just do 2 partitions max. 1 for OS / Apps second for games / data. Making a partition just for the pagefile is just stupid anymore. You won't notice a lick of difference, the new systems and hard drives are plenty fast enough.

My last tid bit of info, depending on what board you wind up using, don't play on moving any raid to another system. Sometimes you can migrate a raid to a different controller, but rarely does it work.

Depending on how important your data is I was just do the mirror and forget about it, cheapest and easiest and won't have any problems moving the drives to another machine in the future.
February 11, 2008 11:24:47 PM

FrozenGpu said:
You guys are all making this more complicated than it need be...

Dude, get a dell! :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 


No I still think this dude is on the right path :whistle: 
February 11, 2008 11:26:51 PM

geofelt said:
The mean time to failure of a typical hard drive is on the order of 1 million hours; that is about 100 years.


:pt1cable:  Holy mis information batman! That couldn't be more wrong. I would say the typical life span for the average drive is 3 years of 24/7 spinning at 7200rpm. I have replaced so many desktop hard drives and server hard drives in my life it's sickening. If just 1 hard drive in the world could last 1 million hours I would be impressed.

Look at the warranty for a drive. If it is 3 years that means the manufacturer will only bet it will last for 3. If it is 5 years, it is probably a better drive. If they will stand behind it for 5 years, expect to last 5 years and anything extra is gravy.

Also after thinking about the whole MTBF number thing, I recall a decent little article that explains that number =P

From http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/qua... (yeah it's old too)

"The most common specification related to drive reliability is mean time between failures or MTBF. This value, usually measured in hours, is meant to represent the average amount of time that will pass between random failures on a drive of a given type. It is usually in the range of 300,000 to 1,200,000 hours for modern drives today (with the range increasing every few years) and is specified for almost every drive.

This number is very often misinterpreted and misused. Usually, the "analysis" goes like this: "Gee, a year contains 8,766 hours. That means my 500,000 MTBF drive should last 57 years." (I have even seen this on the web site of a major hard disk manufacturer that shall remain nameless to spare them the embarrassment!) After concluding that the MTBF means the drive will last for decades, amusingly, one of two opposite things usually happens: either the person actually thinks the drive will last half a century or longer, or the opposite: they realize this is crazy and so they write off the entire MTBF figure as "obvious exaggeration and therefore useless". The real answer of course is neither. (It is obviously impossible for any individual hard disk to be tested to anywhere near the amount of time required to provide a MTBF factor near even 100,000, never mind 500,000.)"

"There are in fact two different types of MTBF figures. When a manufacturer is introducing a new drive to the market, it obviously has not been in use in the real world, so they have no data on how the drive will perform. Still, they can't just shrug and say "who knows?", because many customers want to know what the reliability of the drive is likely to be. To this end, the companies calculate what is called a theoretical MTBF figure. This number is based primarily upon the analysis of historical data; for example: the historical failure rate of other drives similar to the one being placed on the market, and the failure rate of the components used in the new model. It's important to realize that these MTBF figures are estimates based on a theoretical model of reality, and thus are limited by the constraints of that model. There are typically assumptions made for the MTBF figure to be valid: the drive must be properly installed, it must be operating within allowable environmental limits, and so on. Theoretical MTBF figures also cannot typically account for "random" or unusual conditions such as a temporary quality problem during manufacturing a particular lot of a specific type of drive."

"The key point to remember when looking at any MTBF figure is that it is meant to be an average, based on testing done on many hard disks over a smaller period of time. Despite the theoretical numbers sometimes seeming artificially high, they do have value when put in proper perspective; a drive with a much higher MTBF figure is probably going to be more reliable than one with a much lower figure. As with most specifications, small differences don't account for much; given that these are theoretical numbers anyway, 350,000 is not much different than 300,000."

:sleep: 

February 11, 2008 11:31:11 PM

geofelt said:
@vtr99:
Do you have any experience with 7200rpm sata drives from a reliability point of view?


Yeah all hard drives fail. I have received many DOA's recently. (7200.10's mind you) A few that died in a week. Many that die over the first few years. I have had many 10k and 15k SAS drives puke recently and SAS isn't all that old....

You name the type of drive I have seen them fail in masses....backup is important.

I would also stick with name brand drives like Seagate and Wester Digital....usually the failure rate on the whole isn't too bad, depending on the model of course =).
February 12, 2008 1:15:27 AM

Perpendicular recording technology is only seen on HDD's that are very large, usually 750GB models and above but there are 500's that have it. It means its faster.
a c 115 G Storage
February 12, 2008 2:15:28 AM

Some clarifications on the preceding:

A. Partitioning isn't worth the trouble - True or False ?

It depends:

On day 1, the partitioned HD will be just about as fast as the non partitioned one.
On day 400, the partitioned HD will kick arse on the non partitioned one.

Reasons:

1. On day 1, all ya stuff is on the first 5% of ya HD. On day 400, you have it half way filled or more. Your windows swap file, where your HD performs most of its activity has now been pushed back to the end of your disk. So on my partitioned HD, it's still up at the 80 MB/s spot....the non partitioned one has it back at the 55 MB/sec mark....or worse.

2. NTFS gives file security and protections but also comes with 5 - 15% overhead. No security / protections req'd for temp / swap files so FAT32 can be used here w/o NTFS's overhead.

3. I'm installing new game on my year old HD. The games partition, which sits at the 32-96 GB mark on my HD is completely empty so my game files will load at 80 MB/sec sitting at the 32 - 40 Gb spot.....the non partitioned drive has 200 Gigs of movie files, itunes and stuff on it already, so the game going on the HD at the 200 - 208 spot where it's about 60 % as fast.

B. RAID speeds things Up - True or False ?

It depends.

Many people refer to the storagereview FAQ as their justification that RAID doesn't do squat.

Well that's not what it says.

Test / Singe Drive / RAID 0 / % difference
SR Office DriveMark 2002 395 IO/sec 426 IO/sec RAID 0 7.85% faster
SR High-End DriveMark 2002 373 IO/sec 408 IO/sec RAID 0 9.38% faster
SR Bootup DriveMark 2002 288 IO/sec 474 IO/sec RAID 0 64.58% faster
SR Gaming DriveMark 2002 519 IO/sec 529 IO/sec RAID 0 1.93% faster

How it works in games depends on how the game loads. For example they write:

..."Interplay's "Baldur's Gate" series, as well as games based on the same engine (Planescape: Torment, Icewind Dale to name a few) benefit from RAID 0 because the levels that they load are essentially huge bitmaps. Because the hard drive is reading one large data file in a linear fashion (as opposed to the heads having to move rapidly back and forth to access many different files), sequential transfer rate is all but the only factor effecting loading speeds. Some other games benefit to a lesser degree. "

And let's not forget, we talking true hardware RAID not fake software RAID like highpoint and stuff.

So no, you won't see 100% speed increase which is what a lot of peeps think they will get.....but 10% is certainly conceivable.....is that worth the price of a 10 % speed increase ? Say an extra $120 for that second 500 GB 7200.11 ? If you say no, then you can't be one of those who would say that a 2.67 GHz is worth $120 more than it's 2.33 GHz counterpart as you would be getting just about the same speed increase. Of course one could argue that the CPU benefit you see all the time and the HD benefit is only during loading and swapping....yeah, so.....for some it will be worth it. But to say it's not worth it to anyone is no different from saying it is worth it to everyone.

C. Just a side note.....RAID 0 isn't gonna be enough to offset the Vista penalty. XP with single drive will be faster than Vista with RAID 0

D. There's no reason a game PC doesn't make a good office PC. The reverse is not true however. In fact. CAD workstations make great gaming PC's and Visa Versa....tho I haven't been playing with any $4k CAD cards of late.....G92'd work just fine.

E. When placing partitions, you want the stuff you want to go fastest placed first. Invariably this means placing OS and swap / temp files closest to the outer edge of disk as possible...this means pout on 1st. Next depends on what you want fastest....games, media, programs.....backups and stuff obviously last.

Finally, one thing you may want to consider is an NAS. The soon to be released Netgear 2150 is going to become a huge player here. With hot swappable HD's, auto rebuilding arrays, it gives you nice portable storage.

http://www.netgear.com/Products/Storage/ReadyNASDuo/RND...

I think you will see this offer renewed when this unit ships:

http://tools.netgear.com/emails/2007/powershift/instant...

As it doesn't much make sense to sell a NAS with 1 drive which is how it's being offered.

I like these buggers as in case of fire or whatever I can grab the handle and run :) 

You can do single drive or RAID ) on ya box and leave all data and files on the NAS. What my son has started doing is he has a relatively small game partition at the front of his drive. When he tires of a game, he copies the whole game out to the NAS. Then he installs a new game on that fast portion of the HD. If he gets bored and wants to play the old one, he swaps them out.....kinda like a jukebox.

You can also store images on the HD on the NAS for cold metal restores.
February 12, 2008 2:39:55 AM

incarnate said:
Yeah all hard drives fail. I have received many DOA's recently. (7200.10's mind you) A few that died in a week. Many that die over the first few years. I have had many 10k and 15k SAS drives puke recently and SAS isn't all that old....

You name the type of drive I have seen them fail in masses....backup is important.

I would also stick with name brand drives like Seagate and Wester Digital....usually the failure rate on the whole isn't too bad, depending on the model of course =).


I used Drive Image 5 for many years, and it was my favorite backup app until PowerQuest screwed up. These days I use Ghost, and backup my C: drive to DVD about once a month. As you say all hard drives eventually fail, but some are much more reliable than others. You have to take most Newegg reviews with a grain of salt, but there is a lot of long term data there that shows some clear patterns. You can compare almost any bargain 7,200rpm drive to the Raptor series and see the Raptors have very few failures. I have always said the hard drive is the weakest link in any system.... It pays to buy quality drives.
!