6 compact flash disk Raid 0 configuration

Hi, I was hoping somebody will have a little insight into this matter.

I have an Adaptec AAR 2610SA 6-Port SATA RAID Controller Card, and was hoping to setup 6 X 4GB High Speed 266X Compact flash cards using CF to SATA adapters in a Raid 0 configuration.
I am not concerned about Data redundancy.

Will this configuration work?
What kind of performance will I see out of an array like this?
I would like to know before I decide to spend the cash on the cards.
Your impute would be much appreciated
12 answers Last reply
More about compact flash disk raid configuration
  1. i guess you're still better off with a WD Velicoraptor
  2. i doubt you will get much performance from using those CF cards in a Raid configuration. Even though they are solid state, their sustained transfer rate is much less than an actual hard drive. all you would be saving is power consumption.

    here's an article on tom's that shows the typical transfer rate improvements of using a SATA CF adapter:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/accelerated-compact-flash,1100-6.html

    just cuz you have an adapter doesn't mean the cards will perform at SATA speeds. as the article shows, they are barely faster than CF transfers with your typical USB2.0 reader.
  3. oh that is an old article, CF cards during that time max out at 9MB/s.
    the 266x CF cards he's planning to use are about 40-45 MB/s.
    anyways, those 4GB cards are expensive, 30 to 40 dollars each while a velicoraptor 150 GB can be had around 160 dollars.
  4. yea, sorry about the old article, but my point was that the OP would be better off getting a regular hdd, and skip out on the CF card idea. 24gb for a boot drive is small for a home computer, and for that price, i agree that he's better off getting a velociraptor. =)
  5. I also have 2X Seagate ST318406LW Cheetah 36ES - 18.3GB Ultra SCSI Wide 68-Pin 10000RPM Hard Drive, are these drives faster than say a new SATA drive? I would also have them in raid 0 config.
  6. What kind of performance are you looking for?

    If you are looking for a place to put your OS, then I would rank some possibilities as follows:
    1) Intel 80gb SSD Other MLC drives have unacceptable write issues.
    2) Velociraptor
    3) Use 10% of a 1tb drive
    4) 10k/15k scsi drive or normal 7200 rpm drive.
    Note that raid-0 does not appear on the list.
    If you will be doing lots of sequential processing, then raid-0 can be good.
    Equally good, and much simpler is to separate the input and output data on two different drives.
  7. Id also like to add that i think you would be in for a world of hurt with your proposed setup.

    Motherboard --> RAID Card --> SATA cable --> Converter --> CF card...

    Generally speaking the more links the easier it is to break/fail.

    Whereas:

    Motherboard --> SATA cable --> HDD

    looks a whole lot nicer.
  8. Intel SSDs are very fast, power efficient, and quiet and would be a good fit for you. They are pricier than tradition HHDs, however.
  9. Imo, get 2 SSD drives in RAID. The SSD will be about the 2 times or so cost as the SATA converters + the CF cards or a little more. SSD drive for $70: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227372

    Check out the 2nd page about SSDs here:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/forum2.php?config=tomshardwareus.inc&cat=31&post=258117&page=2&p=1&sondage=0&owntopic=3&trash=0&trash_post=0&print=0&numreponse=0&quote_only=0&new=0&nojs=0
  10. Writes on the new Intel MLC dont even get 100mb/s
    http://techreport.com/articles.x/15931/10

    How would these OCZ Cores get close to that?
  11. ^ That's the thing. You see those results are for a single drive not a RAID array. Having a RAID array should speed up the real time data writes quite a bit. Also it appears that you need to disable certain things (in Vista):
    http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43525
    to get best performance.
  12. CF cards don't support DMA transfer, so the control card would have to wait while each transfer was processed; this would effectively kill any chance of faster read speeds, also if you look at the way RAID 0 works (effectively hiding the seek-read time) which FLASH devices don't have...

    Write times would probably be faster (and stalling reduced) due to the load being spread over multiple cards, but you would still have the wear problems of FLASH, typicaly 100,000 writes (for good quality cards).
Ask a new question

Read More

Flash Media Compact Flash NAS / RAID Configuration Storage Product