• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

16MB Cache 250GB SATA Hard Drive $93

Nice...500GB for under $200, that's tempting 😉

(except that I only have two Serial ATA ports and I'm already using one of them 😱)
 
Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
Nice...500GB for under $200, that's tempting 😉

(except that I only have two Serial ATA ports and I'm already using one of them 😱)
Click to expand...

I am so close to breaking out the wallet, 1 Terabyte of hardware RAID 0 x4 for less than $400! But I am wating because I know it will only get better!
 
Originally posted by: Dhaval00
I can't trust Maxtor for 500 GB of my data any given day :S.
Click to expand...
Mator? must be why he says cheap raid , raid 1 cause its likely to fail.
 
everyone flames maxtor.
everyone flames WD
everyone is undecided with Haitchi whatever
we all heard Seagte also failed many time but yet praised..

guys for once I will threadcrap and say STFU...

we all heard peoplle supporting Maxtor aswell
with Haitchi, samsung, WD, Seagate.

its either Noise, failure, Hot or something ya complain about when it comes to HD.
I have acknowledge when searching for realible HD, i seen the good and the bad on all product and concluded there isnt a PERFECT HD out there. plain and simple.

maxtor is still a active HD supplier and it would have went down to hell if those complains were true to a point to hurt thier sales.
nuff said..
 
Originally posted by: Novercalis
everyone flames maxtor.
everyone flames WD
everyone is undecided with Haitchi whatever
we all heard Seagte also failed many time but yet praised..

guys for once I will threadcrap and say STFU...

we all heard peoplle supporting Maxtor aswell
with Haitchi, samsung, WD, Seagate.

its either Noise, failure, Hot or something ya complain about when it comes to HD.
I have acknowledge when searching for realible HD, i seen the good and the bad on all product and concluded there isnt a PERFECT HD out there. plain and simple.

maxtor is still a active HD supplier and it would have went down to hell if those complains were true to a point to hurt thier sales.
nuff said..
Click to expand...

🙁 maxtor fan boys
 
actually no, I just recently did buy this product, I'll admit that for the price and what I needed is 500gb HD i jumped on this
but a fanboy sir, nope.

My current HD is a generic.. i dont even know the name of it.
but in all the new egg reviews (as well in the AT forums) I looked in, there was always 1 person minimum who complained it failed
1 person who said loud
1 person who said it gets HOT
for each brandname.

trust me, I'll flip out if I get a bad batch.. but as long this HD can sustain me for 2yrs i wil be a happy camper.
im not supporting maxtor so if and when I do bitch out the HD fail, so be it.. but for someone new looking into HD how am I suppose to choose when all feedbacks had flamed each one.
 
Originally posted by: RiDE
Everyone whines about all HD brands

But I see more people whining about Maxtor
Click to expand...

exactly and with good reason too. But this deal is okay.
 
What kind of raid array do people generally run? And what are the advantages/disadvantages to each? (My mobo supports it).
 
Originally posted by: Wag
What kind of raid array do people generally run? And what are the advantages/disadvantages to each? (My mobo supports it).
Click to expand...
I think the general concensus is if you have to ask about RAID you don't need it....😉
 
Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Originally posted by: Wag
What kind of raid array do people generally run? And what are the advantages/disadvantages to each? (My mobo supports it).
Click to expand...
I think the general concensus is if you have to ask about RAID you don't need it....😉
Click to expand...
I see, well, thanks for nothing.

Now can someone answer my question?

 
Raid 0 = 2 drives made into 1 large drive, cuts loading times down but not too much, one drive fails and everything is gone
Raid 1 = 2 drives, 1 drive backs up the other drive, no performance advantages
And theres a bunch of other raids out there like raid 0+1, etc.
 
Originally posted by: Wag
What kind of raid array do people generally run? And what are the advantages/disadvantages to each? (My mobo supports it).
Click to expand...

RAID 0:
Requires a minimum of 2 drives. Data is split between the two drives. Your capacity is the combined total of the two drives. This is also a higher performance configuration. However, if one drive fails, you lose all your data.

RAID 1:
Requires a minimum of 2 drives. Data is written to both drives at the same time. Your capacity is that of only one of the drives. If you lose a drive, you still have a copy on the other drive. However, don't consider this a replacement for backups. If your RAID controller starts spewing crap or you otherwise overwrite a file, it is gone.

RAID 0+1:
Requires a minimum of 4 drives. This is a combination of RAID levels 1 and 0. Your capacity is the combined total of two of the drives. You have two RAID 0s which are mirrors of each other. The advantage of this is you get the performance of RAID 0 with the redundancy of RAID 1. However, it requires 4 drives which can be costly.

RAID 5:
Requires a minimum of 3 drives. Your capacity is n-p where "n" is your total number of drives and "p" is the number of parity drives. If you have 3 drives and 1 is a parity drive, your capacity is the combined total of 2. If you have 5 drives and 2 of them are parity, your capacity is the total of 3. The more parity drives you have, the more drive failures you can sustain before losing data. Not all RAID controllers support this. It also can be a burden on your CPU if you are using a software RAID 5 due to the computation of the parity bit. Additionally, there are grumblings of people having issues restoring a lost drive in a RAID 5.

All of the above assume drive sizes are the same. Also, just to reiterate, RAID is not a replacement for good backups.

Hope that helps...
 
Originally posted by: Novercalis
everyone flames maxtor.
everyone flames WD
everyone is undecided with Haitchi whatever
we all heard Seagte also failed many time but yet praised..

guys for once I will threadcrap and say STFU...

we all heard peoplle supporting Maxtor aswell
with Haitchi, samsung, WD, Seagate.

its either Noise, failure, Hot or something ya complain about when it comes to HD.
I have acknowledge when searching for realible HD, i seen the good and the bad on all product and concluded there isnt a PERFECT HD out there. plain and simple.

maxtor is still a active HD supplier and it would have went down to hell if those complains were true to a point to hurt thier sales.
nuff said..
Click to expand...
well said ... fanboys need to shut up

every brand of hard drive out there fails some


this deal is tempting .... seems like the prices are dropping all across the board, because to new tech coming out.




 
Originally posted by: Wag
Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Originally posted by: Wag
What kind of raid array do people generally run? And what are the advantages/disadvantages to each? (My mobo supports it).
Click to expand...
I think the general concensus is if you have to ask about RAID you don't need it....😉
Click to expand...
I see, well, thanks for nothing.

Now can someone answer my question?
Click to expand...


The two most common forms of RAID arrays are RAID0 and RAID1.

RAID0 creates a stripe array; basically, it combines the two HDs to form a single huge HD. This effectively increases your storage space and cache. So let's say you have two 160GB HDs with 8MB cache on each. In RAID0, they'll add up to 320GB with an effective cache size of 16MB. But, there is a huge catch - in RAID), if one HD fails, the entire array fails... so ultimately, you'd end up losing 320GB of data (as far as the above example goes).

RAID1 creates a mirror array; basically, it makes a mirror image of your primary RAID HD. So every bit of info you write on the first HD, gets written to the second HD. If your primary HD fails, you can turn to your mirrored HD for backup or data retrieval. Here the catch is that your effective size available to you will be only 160GB.

As far as I am concerned, I wouldn't stripe my HDs in any RAID array. If I have the money, I'll go for RAID1 just for data security. Also, there is the dilemma of choosing an IDE drive or a SATA drive. Most (almost all of them) of the drives today don't even exploit the 133MB/sec data bus of the IDE channel. The only advantage of getting a SATA drive is you get thinner, sexier cables. Ofcourse there is Seagate's NCQ technology, but its performance will become evident only when OSes like Vista become public. By the way, most mobos offer support for RAIDing IDE hard drives, too.

Hope this helps.

^Edited^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top