Two new samsungs vs three wd blues for read only in raid 0 Tags: Hard Drives NAS / RAID Read Only Western Digital Storage Last response: June 29, 2009 4:20 AM in Storage Share joojoo1234 June 28, 2009 4:22:02 AM Which would be faster for read only... (sample streaming) Two 32mb cache Samsung hd103uj 1tb sata drives in raid 0. Three 8mb cache 320gb WD Blue's in Raid 0. I know that three is better than one but the new samsung is so fast in read.... http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-overtakes-a... Anybody positive enough about this to give me good advice about which to do? Am using for music keyboard sample.. loading for piano samples and want maximum polyphony. I could go ahead and buy another blue... and go four... ? This is my first thread at good old Toms Hardware Guide... so help a bro out. More about : samsungs blues read raid MomoCC June 29, 2009 4:20:08 AM Hey joojoo, I'd go for the Samsung if you just wanted speed. Though I'd rely on the WD drives, which have a better track record of reliability. Can't find your answer ? Ask ! Publish Related resources 4x 320gb WD blue caviar HDD on raid 0 vs 1x64gb crucial m4 SDD Forum 2 x WD Caviar Blue RAID 0 vs. Single WD Caviar Black Forum Samsung F1 TB vs 2 WD 500GB RAID 0 Forum More resources Read discussions in other Storage categories Hard Drives DVD Drives DVD Writers Optical Media Flash Media NAS/RAID SSD Western Digital !