4x60gb or two 1200JB in RAID 0?

[larciel]

4x60gb 7200rpm let's say maxtor? in RAID 0 w/ TX4

or

2x120gb 8mb WD in RAID 0 w/ TX2

what do ya think? 😀 ..

 

[Viper GTS]

I think you need to smack that Promise controller & get yourself a 3Ware.

Viper GTS

 

[larciel]

lol .. budget is limiited sorry 🙂

and it's not for my pc.. muahahah

 

[sharkeeper]

Definitely 2 1200JB drives.

There is a quite a discussion here regarding this.

The 8MB WD100 and WD1200 have very impressive performance.

Cheers!

 

[BurnItDwn]

You would get slightly better sustained rates with the 4 60gb drives, You would also be taking a bigger chance.

 

[FishTankX]

I wouldn't use 4 drives. Espically IBM ones! One drive fails and *poof*..

The RAID aray is dead..

 

[Bushwicktrini]

<< I wouldn't use 4 drives. Espically IBM ones! One drive fails and *poof*..

The RAID aray is dead.. >>



The same thing will happen with two drives. That said I would go with the wd120's

 

[FishTankX]

The thing is that with the 2 drives you have *half* the chance of faliure, plus WD's have relativley healthy failure rates, compared to the likes of IBM. I believe that the 2 WD1200JB's would have awesome performance, but if you loose one.. *poof*. I would rather have 4 60GB drives in Raid0+1.

 

[kellygirlbeads]

arrgh! raid 0 ? come on, isnt reliability more important than the extra 60 gigs? I'd suggest a 180 gig array (3 * 60 + 1 for the parity data).

 

[KK]

<< arrgh! raid 0 ? come on, isnt reliability more important than the extra 60 gigs? I'd suggest a 180 gig array (3 * 60 + 1 for the parity data). >>



I agree with the raid 5 setup. I have 2 PCs, one running 3 30GB drives in raid 0, and one running raid 5 with 5 80GB drives. I'm constantly worried that the raid 0 setup will lose one of the drives leaving me pretty well screwed. I even bought a 100GB drive just to backup the data on that one just in case the worst happens. With the raid 5 one, not a worry in the world. Although the SX6000 controller card does set you back 250, well worth it considering I spent 180 on the backup drive for the raid 0 setup.

As far as performance wise to the original question, I'd have to think that 4 drives would give you faster times than just 2 drives. I don't know how much that 8MB buffer would actually help you out. Now if it was a standalone drive, yes it'd help out alot. Is there any decent tests out there to test your harddrive speeds? That pcmark test only gives me around 650 for the raid 5 setup. I would have to believe it'd be alittle faster than that.

KK

 

[cleverhandle]

I seem to recall reading that the benefit of the larger buffer in the JB is decreased in a RAID 0 setup. Can't say that I understand the technicalities well enough to comment on it, though. But if so, just using the BB's might be an option to save money.

But do you really need the drives in RAID? I'm guessing that if you want 240GB of storage, you're building a video editing box, so the RAID would help with your STR's. But if you just need the storage space and STR is not a big concern, I would just run the 2 JB's separately - less maintenance hassle and less risky.

 

[larciel]

Lol.. i've never said IBM 60gb 😀 but somehow everyone think i said it 😉