Help Me With Hard Drives!

[sireternal]

Thanks for coming.

Anyway, I'm planning on building a new computer. Gaming takes priority. (Anything else I would want I could do on a much cheaper computer or don't need to do at all, if I -had- to choose between doing it best or doing gaming best -- I don't do much anything system-demanding except for gaming.) Various other entertainment would take second like DVDs, music, maybe a TV tuner. And anything else I would want to do like use the internet and simple applications like word processing doesn't need high-end stuff anyway, so no use trying to optimise just for it, anyway, of course. (And I only hardware I have more or less decided on thus far is a nice DFI SLI 939 Socket MoBo, a GeForce 7800 GTX card [I might just wait to build until I can get two of them, as prices might be down, if I really want SLI], some type of higher-end Athlon 64 CPU [3800+ or better], 2GB of RAM, and a black 22" CRT monitor -- I'll be saving for a bit before I begin, so I get the best possible prices or even better hardware for the money.)

Anyway, that's my lengthy purpose and what hardware I've decided on thus far, now for my questions..

Should I go for the speedy 74GB Raptor or get a slower drive with much more space?

I would have much more of an idea of which to lean towards if not for the fact that I haven't seen much about how much noticably better the 10k RPM Raptor is over the standard 7200 RPM drives.

Would it be fast enough to justify choosing it and would it be useful to a gamer? Sadly, hard drives is probably what I know the least about when it comes to performance differences.

And next, RAID. For example, I've seen people mixing and matching such as using two 74GB raptors and a 120GB WD.

Basically, what (practically applied) RAIDs are used to boost performance and how many drives does each support? (I don't remember hearing that RAID 0 supports more than two harddrives. Is it another RAID?) And what HDD configuration ultimately seems suitable for me?

I know, a lot to digest and a lot to answer. (Not that you HAVE to answer -everything- if you don't know about something or don't have the time.)

Thanks a bunch if you rise to the challenge.

- Sir Eternal

 

[emogoch]

Basically, what (practically applied) RAIDs are used to boost performance and how many drives does each support? (I don't remember hearing that RAID 0 supports more than two harddrives. Is it another RAID?) And what HDD configuration ultimately seems suitable for me?

RAID 0 can support (in theory at least) as many drives as you want, though your southbridge would probably only have 4 drive support. The reason that you might not want to put more than 2 drives together in a RAID 0 is that the % chance of losing ALL data on your RAID = (% chance of one disk failing) * (# of disks in array) ==> more drive means better chacne to lose everything. That, and I believe (though could be mistaken), that the performance increase curve flattens out as you add more drives. If you were going for a 4 drive array, I'd recommend RAID 1+0 or 0+1 instead so that you get some fault tolerance.

No idea about the 10k vs. 7.2k drives though. Leave that for someone else.

 

[sireternal]

So the performance gain peaks at a RAID 0 array with 2 drives then, if that is right.

That brings me much closer, thanks for the answer.

 

[RichPLS]

If you are not worried about security, then more drives in a RAID 0 equals a nearly linear bandwidth increase up to around 6 drives.
RAID 0 on 4 drives will nearly be double the transfer rate of RAID 0 with 2 drives.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

 

[RichPLS]

But for real performance you want a hardware RAID controller so your CPU is not saddled with managing stripes.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

 

[sireternal]

Ah, yes. I was just sitting around thinking about it when I reliezed I had misunderstood. I thought it was meant that the more drives you have over two, the more it flattens out to the normal speed, but I relieze that it was meant that additional drives would still show a performance increase but less each time!

Any major differences between RAID controllers, such as one that is generally accepted to be the best?

And does anyone know the performance difference between a Raptor and a 7200 RPM drive?

EDIT: And of course there's always the super expensive SCSIs.. Seems WAY too expensive to consider but while on the topic, anyone know the performance difference between 7200/10k RPM and 15K RPM SCSI drives?
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by sireternal on 08/05/05 08:32 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[joe_tlj]

And does anyone know the performance difference between a Raptor and a 7200 RPM drive?

Yes, it's the same difference between a SUV and a Ferrari. Do you want the storage space or the speed? Anyone even considering SLI shouldn't have to ponder that question too long.

One last thing, please don't get the CRT monitor. Dell's 2001fp is real nice, and a fantastic value.



There's nothing as dangerous as a wounded mosquito.

 

[sireternal]

So I'll notice a big increase in games, eh? (Such as does it effect in-game performance or really only loading screens?) Because I don't really plan on running any other system-intensive applications that would require such a big difference in performance. The only thing I'd maybe need a lot of space for is if I decided to record stuff from a TV tuner. But if I use RAID 0 on a couple of 74GB Raptors eventually, it wouldn't be that bad. SCSIs are unrealistic to consider, I assume?

As for the monitor, why? It's about as much or more money as the CRT, it's screen is a little smaller, and CRTs are much better if you want a better image and truer color. I just don't see the wisdom of switching, especially when one of the reviews I saw when I looked up the monitor listed "mediocre image quality" as a point, and it's specifically said it looks good with everything 'except games and movies', about the two only things I'll be doing besides the internet. =P If I'm going to spend $600 on a monitor, it might as well be a nice one that I won't have to replace any time soon that's optimal for gaming. (And that I can see from any angle - such as when using it as a TV from a distance.)

And one more thing, RAID 0... I've heard it increases performance many times, but how much really. Double? Easily noticable? I understand how it works, but I haven't heard much about how much it really helps.

EDIT: I just found a great review for Raptors on PCStats. (http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1746)

It was pretty much exactly the performance comparisons I wanted to see, but sadly the only game-related test they did was Doom III, which showed only minor FPS differences. (They did mention the only place it would likely help much in games was loading maps.)

Well, is it worth the speed premium to buy the Raptors? What other tasks that I might do would benefit from the greater speed?
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by sireternal on 08/06/05 02:37 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[RichPLS]

RAID 0 will increase load time and other disk intensive parts of the game. It will not have much if any impact on gameplay and fps.
RAID 0 will speed up boot times, and large file transfers...

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

 

[sireternal]

Thanks!

I suppose the best configuration is two 74GB Raptors, then? I see that a lot on some game PCs around here and it sounds pretty good. (If I really needed more room, I guess I could add a roomier WD for recording TV and such too.. except would I want to keep it seperate from the RAID 0 array because of the speed difference?)

And speaking of that, one more question. I've read somewhere that adding a drive to the RAID 0 array requires rebuilding the array. What's the best way to add drives to the array or replace drives without losing data?

 

[joe_tlj]

I just did a google search for: 2001fp "mediocre image quality"

Well, it looks like slander been spread everywhere, but notice that they all say the same thing:
"using the DVI signal; mediocre image quality;"
This is the same CNET review that's been copied and pasted everywhere. I never really take cnet too seriously. Try PCmag.com, or anandtech.com, or our own tomshardware.com for more accurate reviews.

If you still are skeptical, check out this review that Maximum PC did in May 2004 for gaming LCD's
<A HREF="http://www.slate-ne.com/images/2001fp2.jpg" target="_new">Dell Ultrasharp 2001FP May</A>
and the follow-up review in June
<A HREF="http://www.slate-ne.com/images/2001fp.jpg" target="_new">Dell Ultrasharp 2001FP June</A>

You're probably going to get the CRT anyway.



There's nothing as dangerous as a wounded mosquito.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Joe_tlj on 08/06/05 12:19 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[RichPLS]

Yes, 2 Raptors RAID 0 will have very high transfer rates and good i/o rates too.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

 

[RichPLS]

You know you can get two 80 gig drives for less money than one RAPTOR, and RAID them to experiment on performance increase. The two 7200rpm drives will be significantly faster than a single raptor.


<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

 

[sireternal]

That may be very true, but even if it is of great image quality for an LCD or monitor in general, if you're willing to take the size of a CRT (which most people wanting to play games should take with all the pros), then you get truer colors, wider viewing angles, and often a cheaper price... and it was a user review on the website that noted it wasn't great for games and movies. (Especially the "poor black levels" that effect dark scenes often seen in games and movies.)

I just really don't see why I should get an LCD. If there is a reason, I'd be glad to listen.

And thanks much for the help, Rich. It would be interesting to try to RAID 0 a couple of 80gb hard drives to see what I'd be getting, maybe I'll get the chance sometime.

Another step closer to knowing what I'll eventually do..

 

[pat]

I switch from a 19 inches CRT to a flat 19 inch LCD and I'll tell you, even if I lost some resolution I wont go bact to a CRT. The space save as well as the heat generated by the 19 inches CRT really worth it. Added the fact that it is really easier on the eyes too after a while... Unless you are an imaging pro or very picky about colours, I doubt that you will have something to complain about image quality.

<font color=red>Sig space for rent. make your offer.</font color=red>

 

[joe_tlj]

It sounds like you've made up your mind.


There's nothing more dangerous than a wounded mosquito.

 

[emogoch]

I've read somewhere that adding a drive to the RAID 0 array requires rebuilding the array. What's the best way to add drives to the array or replace drives without losing data?

1) "Acquire" a copy of <A HREF="http://symantec.com/ghost/ghost_personal/" target="_new">Norton Ghost</A>
2) Create image of files using Ghost and save it to a desk separate from your RAID array
3) Add / Replace drives and rebuild empty array
4) Use Ghost and the back-up image to dump files back.

Simplest way to do it. If you have a hardware controller, or possibly some really fancy software, you may be able to add drives to the array without having to rebuild it, but I doubt it'll be any faster than the above method. And you definitly won't be able to replace drives.

 

[emogoch]

Really? I wouldn't use it to make a partition image, but rather a folder image using the root drive. At that level, I would have though it would be all OS controlled, and Ghost would just see it as a set of files like it would on a single drive.

If Ghost truely won't work, you can always try looking at their enterprise based solutions. Last but not leat, just copy all the files onto a separate drive, re-build, copy back.

 

[silverpig]

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2101" target="_new">Don't waste your money with two raptors in raid 0</A>

It actually slows down level loading times. If you've got a server, go RAID5, or 0+1. If you do a lot of heavy video editing (like gigabyte sized files), then go RAID 0. If you game, just get a single large drive.

s signature has been formatted to fit your scr

 

[RichPLS]

Actually 2 Raptors one drive for XP the other for data and swap file would be awesome.

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>

 

[RichPLS]

Come eat some <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=171733#171733" target="_new"> cake!!! </A>

I made it myself!
Rich

<pre><font color=red>°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°`°¤o \\// o¤°`°¤o,¸¸¸,o¤°
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>