I have been searching for days now for a review comparing similar drives in a raid 0, versus raid 1, versus a single drive. I have found reviews from years ago but noting recent. Basically what I have found is that Raid 0 basically gives no real world gain in perfomance. Benchmarks is another story of course. I don't care about benchmarks. All I care about is real world peformance in terms of windows booting, games loading, etc.
I am going to be using an EVGA SLI X58 mobo that has the Intel ICH10R raid controller. I already have one Samsung Spinpoint F3 1tb drive. I am planning on ordering a second one to use in either a raid 0 or raid 1 configuration. If there is really no perfomance gain using Raid 0 then I will use Raid 1. If Raid 1 causes a lose in perfomance then I will just use the 2nd drive as a back up not in Raid.
I know SSDs are the place to be. I will get one when the prices drop to around $1 a gb. For now I am sticking with HDD.
I am going to be using my system mainly for gaming. I was thinking about just ordering a second drive and testing them out myself. First as Raid 0 then as Raid 1. If I could find a review by someone that has already done this it would save me a lot of time and hassle.
RAID 0 only offers a real world performace increase in very limited circumstances. RAID 1 wont cause a notable hit in performance and provides redundancy which is well worth having. If you dont want redundancy save your money and dont worry about a second HDD. If you want some performance gain buy a Velicoraptor for a system drive.
I've already purchased one Samsung Spinpoint F3. So at this point I was planning on buying a second and either going with Raid 0 or Raid 1.
Your saying Raid 0 really isn't worth the additional risk or expense for a gaming rig. What is bothering me is some reviews I've read showed like a 25-40% increase in map load times when gaming. Maybe that isn't really the case.
I ordered a second Samsung Spinpoint F3. I will keep doing research over the next few days but it looks like I will be trying both Raid 0 and Raid 1 myself to see how much of a difference there really is.
When I buy a SSD drive I will switch the Spinpoints over to Raid 1 regardless and use them for backup and storage.
Well anything of any importance can vary. LOL Not really I guess is the answer. My biggest concern is that my itunes folder is getting out of control. It is almost 100gb! I do back it up but everyday stuff like pictures and such I don't always remember to backup. When my harddrive failed on my laptop I lost a few hundred pictures from a vacation. My girlfriend was rather pissed off.
So if I lost a drive using raid 0 it would suck. It wouldn't cost me anyting since this is mainly my gaming rig but it would still suck. Loss of time and frustration mostly.
If Raid 0 is much faster than that is what I will use. If it really isn't that much faster than I will stick to Raid 1 and wait for SSD drives to drop in price.
RAID1 might not make alot sense if you do not have a backup.
If you don't want to lose your data, you should have a backup. RAID alone does not protect against dataloss; only some forms of hardware failure.
If you have a backup, then performance and accessibility are the two last remaining focal points. Accessibility is more a company thing, leaving performance. The only RAID level that adds to performance without a 'but' is RAID0. If you utilize backups and RAID effectively, you can get the best out of both world and have both reliable and fast storage.
RAID0 is also extreme common in any computer:
- multi-core CPUs
- dual/triple/quad channel DRAM
- Double Data Rate (DDR) memory (DDR/QDR/ODR)
- SLI graphic cards
- PCI-express multi-lane transport
- SSD's multi-channels
All these are basically the same thing: interleaving. RAID0 involves interleaving your HDDs, optimizing for parallel access. If you can do two things in the same time as you do one, you can have massive performance increase.
So is RAID0 the way to go? Only if you can withstand a full drive failure at any particular moment without ruiining your day. Think about that. If that's true, i see no reason not to use RAID0. It gives you close to 0% benefit in some cases, but can go up to 100% benefit in both sequential throughput and random IOps.