Tom's Hardware > Forum > Motherboards & Memory > Memory > dual memory vs raid 0

dual memory vs raid 0

Forum Motherboards & Memory : Memory - dual memory vs raid 0

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
dinkster9   10-10-2003 at 08:28:47 AM

Okay, I can't seem to figure this one out, so someone please inlightin me...

I'm under the assumption that in a raid 0 array, two hard drives operate as one, theoretically doubling your performance because now two controllers are working instead of one, the information is split up and 1/2 goes to one hard drive and 1/2 goes to the other hard drive at the same time. Therefore you only really have use of the space equal to the size of 1 drive even though two are installed.

Correct?

So now to dual channel memory mode, so if i have two ram sticks in dual mode, is my assumption correct that information is being written to both sticks of ram at the same time therefore increasing bandwidth?...but you don't actually lose the space of one stick though, so if you have 256x2 in dual channel, you still have use of 512 megs.

correct?

it all seems a bit strange, because arn't these two different things accomplishing the same task with different results? I realize this is compairing apples and oranges, but their ideas seem the same, can anyone clear this up for me?

<font color=purple>A7n8xDX2.0|B2500+@200x11=3200+(2.2ghz)(1.775v)Corsair512twinxpc3200llpt(2-2-2-6)R9700P(stock)160Gx2WD7200RPM 8MB HD|Enermax460W|T:43C@N,50C@FL,MB 28C|3DMark2001 17087|3DMark2003 5134</font color=purple><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by dinkster9 on 10/09/03 11:30 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
bum_jcrules   10-10-2003 at 06:41:52 PM
- 0 +

Dual channel would be better understood as a single HDD with two connections/cables, with each one connected to its own interface controller and a connection between the two controllers together.

<A HREF="http://www.nvidia.com/object/LO_20010528_5545.html" target="_new">See page five of nVidia's Technical brief.</A>

The two controllers can work together or independent. They act as a team of two individuals and as a single unit unlike the Raid 0 example that only acts as one unit.



<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com//modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=7" target="_new">Check out the new Case Mod and PSU section of the THGC</A>

Reply to bum_jcrules
cyberstatic   10-11-2003 at 01:33:42 AM
- 0 +

to my understanding the two memory channels act independently, and using the P875 chipset and a P4 C as an example they FSB has 800mhz of bandwidth, so it can handle alot more then the 400mhz input of one channel, so the two channels interleave their cycles so one writes while one reads then the switch, so the FSB is getting input from 2 400mhz channels effectivly boosting the memorys bandwidth to 800mhz as well so it's got a 1:1 ratio to the FSB and your using the full capability of the FSB im not sure how it compairs to RAID 0 as i know little about RAID

Reply to cyberstatic
Crashman   10-11-2003 at 06:19:09 AM
- 0 +

Completely WRONG!

First thing is, you don't understand RAID, so you can't make a comparison. Let me give you a quick RAID starter:

RAID stands for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks.

Level 0 is a function of a "RAID controller" but isn't true RAID because it's not redundant.

The most popular arrays for PC are Level 0 and RAID 1. Level 0 takes two drives and makes them parallel by using a processor to divide the data into chunks and send it to two drives simultaniously. RAID 1 is completely redundant, one drive is a coppy of the other.

Level 0 would make 2 30GB drives operate as 1 60GB drive with increased speed.

RAID1 would make 2 30GB drives operate as 1 30GB drive and 1 copy, no speed increase.

So you see, the type of array you were refering two makes 2 drives operate as 1 drive twice the size of the smallest drive. 30+30=60. And that's why your analogy fails.

Now, Dual Channel DDR SDRAM takes 2 64-bit modules and makes them parallel on a 128-bit path. 256MB+256MB=512MB.

Look at it like 2 1 gallon buckets of watter. If you have 1 faucet and a divider, you can fill both buckets at once. But if you have 2 faucets filling the two buckets, you can fill them both twice as quickly. Either way, the end result is that you still have 2 buckets of water, not one.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

Reply to Crashman
Crashman   10-11-2003 at 06:22:02 AM
- 0 +

Actually as far as I know Intel does there best to make the two 62-bit modules operate as if they were 1 128-bit module. nVidia does things differently because AMD doesn't need the extra bandwidth.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

Reply to Crashman
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Motherboards & Memory > Memory > dual memory vs raid 0
Go to:

There are 1196 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.243 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?