Hey Guys,
Ive seen alot of posts about people thinking about making a new system with RAID-0 but are unsure of the advantages/disadvantages. After my latest build (pieced together from some other parts as well as new ones bought) i did a small bit of testing of a single drive vs a RAID-0 with 2 of the same drives. If there is any other suggested benchmarks that you would like me to run ill give them a go, as i have another 500gb AAKS drive i can install for testing, i have only used HD-tune.
System:
P180
e7200 (OCed to 3.04ghz, i will be pushing this further soon)
Arctic Freezer 7 Pro
Asus P5KR mobo
2x WD 500gb AAKS
Asus 7900GT
First i used the single 500gb drive to install WinXP with only drivers installed (partition was full size of drive)
Second, i setup the RAID-0 in the configuration manager (Ctrl+H on boot) took about 2 seconds to do. I then installed Server2008 Standard (sorry for OS change but this is the OS that i will be using with this machine). Again partition was full size of array (~930gb)
As you can see there is quite a performance increase in Transfer rate (close to x2 the performance), access times stay the same (to be expected) burst rate about the same (also to be expected)... What i was a little perplexed with was the CPU usage, although this is more than likely just an anommoly, and i would expect the CPU usage to be lower than the RAID-0 array test. I didnt notice this until after i installed the RAID-0 drive otherwise i would have ran the test again.
EDIT: Just realised i didnt put in some disadvantages of RAID-0, The main disadvantage is that if one disk fails in the array you will loose all data on the whole array. RAID-0 is sometimes refered to the non-RAID, RAID of the bunch (or similar). This is because RAID stands for Redundant Array of Independant Disks, as RAID-0 isnt redundant its kind of a non-event. The other problem that some may encounter is more to do with creating an array with an onboard controller, this is because if the motherboard fails, or you simply wish to move the array to another machine it more than likely wont work. This is because there is no standard for the array information to be stored within the controller. This enables manufacturers so "make" there own system of information store, which other controllers wont recognise. So to transplant an array you will generally need exactly the same or similar chip/manufacturer card for the array to function once moved.
Just a quick bit of extra info for you, I also have a file server running RAID-5 on an Adaptec 3805 controller with 8 WD 500gb AAKS drives attached (3.18TB total) I ran a couple of tests on it as well, i was a little dissapointed with the Transfer rate, however, it is to be noted that the transfer rate doesnt drop over the sustained testing of the entire 3.18Tb volume which is more impressive. I also noticed that HD-Tune didnt seem to want to use the whole array for testing (2199Gb displayed) so i used HD-Tach to confirm results (which reported correct size), this must be some issue with HD-Tune and GPT disks. HD-Tach reported a slightly higher average transfer rate (~20mb/s).
The RAID-0 seems to not only boot into Server2008 very quick, but it also seems snapper in and around the OS itself. Might be interesting to test some games on loading times and possibly FPS figures as well, although im unsure how they will run on Server2008. So all in all im happy with the increase, considering the extra drive was only $95AU to purchase.
Hope ive helped some of you out there.
Ive seen alot of posts about people thinking about making a new system with RAID-0 but are unsure of the advantages/disadvantages. After my latest build (pieced together from some other parts as well as new ones bought) i did a small bit of testing of a single drive vs a RAID-0 with 2 of the same drives. If there is any other suggested benchmarks that you would like me to run ill give them a go, as i have another 500gb AAKS drive i can install for testing, i have only used HD-tune.
System:
P180
e7200 (OCed to 3.04ghz, i will be pushing this further soon)
Arctic Freezer 7 Pro
Asus P5KR mobo
2x WD 500gb AAKS
Asus 7900GT
First i used the single 500gb drive to install WinXP with only drivers installed (partition was full size of drive)
Second, i setup the RAID-0 in the configuration manager (Ctrl+H on boot) took about 2 seconds to do. I then installed Server2008 Standard (sorry for OS change but this is the OS that i will be using with this machine). Again partition was full size of array (~930gb)
As you can see there is quite a performance increase in Transfer rate (close to x2 the performance), access times stay the same (to be expected) burst rate about the same (also to be expected)... What i was a little perplexed with was the CPU usage, although this is more than likely just an anommoly, and i would expect the CPU usage to be lower than the RAID-0 array test. I didnt notice this until after i installed the RAID-0 drive otherwise i would have ran the test again.
EDIT: Just realised i didnt put in some disadvantages of RAID-0, The main disadvantage is that if one disk fails in the array you will loose all data on the whole array. RAID-0 is sometimes refered to the non-RAID, RAID of the bunch (or similar). This is because RAID stands for Redundant Array of Independant Disks, as RAID-0 isnt redundant its kind of a non-event. The other problem that some may encounter is more to do with creating an array with an onboard controller, this is because if the motherboard fails, or you simply wish to move the array to another machine it more than likely wont work. This is because there is no standard for the array information to be stored within the controller. This enables manufacturers so "make" there own system of information store, which other controllers wont recognise. So to transplant an array you will generally need exactly the same or similar chip/manufacturer card for the array to function once moved.
Just a quick bit of extra info for you, I also have a file server running RAID-5 on an Adaptec 3805 controller with 8 WD 500gb AAKS drives attached (3.18TB total) I ran a couple of tests on it as well, i was a little dissapointed with the Transfer rate, however, it is to be noted that the transfer rate doesnt drop over the sustained testing of the entire 3.18Tb volume which is more impressive. I also noticed that HD-Tune didnt seem to want to use the whole array for testing (2199Gb displayed) so i used HD-Tach to confirm results (which reported correct size), this must be some issue with HD-Tune and GPT disks. HD-Tach reported a slightly higher average transfer rate (~20mb/s).
The RAID-0 seems to not only boot into Server2008 very quick, but it also seems snapper in and around the OS itself. Might be interesting to test some games on loading times and possibly FPS figures as well, although im unsure how they will run on Server2008. So all in all im happy with the increase, considering the extra drive was only $95AU to purchase.
Hope ive helped some of you out there.