RAID 0 or RAID 5??? Want best performance for the money..

[Mackie2k]

Building this new bad ass system, it will be my overall workstation for work, games etc...

I was thinging about either running dual RAPTORS in raid 0, or 3 Maxtor 16meg 300gig in Raid 5.....

What would be the better choice....?

I saw that the Maxtor 16meg 300gigs, actually ran faster than the raptors in Raid0 vs Raid 0 in a review online

 

[Gamingphreek]

RAID is not for the average consumer. You probably wont see many benefits from it. If you are really looking for a speed boost make the move to SCSI.

As for the Maxtors, they really only shine if you have a motherboard that suppors NCQ (Nforce 4, Intel Chipsets). Even then the Seagate HDD are much better quality. The Raptors would be an utter waste of money. What are you going to be doing on this system that requires RAID? Like i said, its an utter waste of money.

If you really want to though, they will be about the same speed, however RAID 5 allows for fault tolerance so you reduce your risk of HDD failure due to RAID by a lot.

Again, if you really need/want the performance boost get SCSI. Otherwise just get a large Seagate Barracuda drive, or a WD Caviar and be done with it.

-Kevin

 

[lotus503]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
RAID is not for the average consumer. You probably wont see many benefits from it. If you are really looking for a speed boost make the move to SCSI.

As for the Maxtors, they really only shine if you have a motherboard that suppors NCQ (Nforce 4, Intel Chipsets). Even then the Seagate HDD are much better quality. The Raptors would be an utter waste of money. What are you going to be doing on this system that requires RAID? Like i said, its an utter waste of money.

If you really want to though, they will be about the same speed, however RAID 5 allows for fault tolerance so you reduce your risk of HDD failure due to RAID by a lot.

Again, if you really need/want the performance boost get SCSI. Otherwise just get a large Seagate Barracuda drive, or a WD Caviar and be done with it.

-Kevin

I have to do some disagreeing Raid wouldnt be an untter waste of money, SCSI on the other hand would be. Simply put SCSI is designed for servers. Take a look at the difference between mtbf's on SCSI drives vs other types. SCSI is designed for 24/7 operation and more business operation. as far as speed goes I am not sure about the difference with the maxtors NCQ vs raptors.

Raid will increase disk performace by a good margin, this will translate into loading apllications and transfering data faster. If its a matter of bang for the buck. well that all depends on what you do with your system. Personally I move large amounts of data on a regular basis, so Raid makes sense for me, I have two raptors raid 0 and disk performance is exceptional, mtbfs of a raptor are close to SCSI without the need to purchase a controller card or a mobo with SCSI. I dont need fault tolerence because I keep current images of my boot drives on secondary drives.

As far as spending a ton of scratch for disks to raid, I dont thing thats the best performance/price thing you could do, then again depending on what you use your system for.

 

[jose]

I'd have to agree w/ Gamingphreek and disagree w/ SQLstice.... I've used scsi since 1989, it is soo much faster/responsive than ide . it's not even a comparison.
As for raid 0 raptors, they don't compare anywhere near the seek time that you will get w/ a 15k scsi drive.

Regards,
Jose

 

[lotus503]

Originally posted by: jose
I'd have to agree w/ Gamingphreek and disagree w/ SQLstice.... I've used scsi since 1989, it is soo much faster/responsive than ide . it's not even a comparison.
As for raid 0 raptors, they don't compare anywhere near the seek time that you will get w/ a 15k scsi drive.

Regards,
Jose

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34202.html

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=x15vs740gd&page=1

 

[crazyeddie]

RAID 0 might help your overall hard drive throughput, but part of "performance" should be reliability. With RAID 0, if either hard drive putters out on you, you lose all of your data on both hard drives. The only redundancy that RAID 0 provides is that if either hard drive crashes you're twice as screwed.

If you want maximum drive performance, simply get a motherboard that is SATA 300 compatible and upgrade when/wait for the new higher-speed drives to be released. If you want the fastest performance available right now, an Ultra 320 SCSI controller and a pair of 15,000rpm Ultra 320 hard drives configured in RAID 0 should fit the bill.

A pair of 15,000rpm Fujitsa 147Gb Ultra 320 drives and an Adaptec 29320A-R OEM Ultra 320 adapter card will set you back $2100.34 at Newegg (S&H is free). You will need to do some searching around for a motherboard with a 64-bit PCI-X slot that supports the adapter though.

For my money, I'd just go the SATA 300 route, but I'm kind of a tightwad...

 

[akugami]

I put in a single Raptor, this gave me a higher cost than a single drive but slightly better than the average performance of an IDE drive. I feel that the cost/risk of Raid0 is simply not worth the slight performance boost it provides for the average computer user. Even the average computer gamer won't really benefit all that much from using Raid0.

Raid5 however is great for anyone who has many GB's of data. I have a Raid5 server at home loaded with all my ripped DVD's as well as shows recorded off of TV. I've had HD's go bad on me 2x and having Raid5 allows me safety in that a single bad drive is not going to render all data on the Raid array useless like a Raid0 config would.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: S0Lstice

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
RAID is not for the average consumer. You probably wont see many benefits from it. If you are really looking for a speed boost make the move to SCSI.

As for the Maxtors, they really only shine if you have a motherboard that suppors NCQ (Nforce 4, Intel Chipsets). Even then the Seagate HDD are much better quality. The Raptors would be an utter waste of money. What are you going to be doing on this system that requires RAID? Like i said, its an utter waste of money.

If you really want to though, they will be about the same speed, however RAID 5 allows for fault tolerance so you reduce your risk of HDD failure due to RAID by a lot.

Again, if you really need/want the performance boost get SCSI. Otherwise just get a large Seagate Barracuda drive, or a WD Caviar and be done with it.

-Kevin

I have to do some disagreeing Raid wouldnt be an untter waste of money, SCSI on the other hand would be. Simply put SCSI is designed for servers. Take a look at the difference between mtbf's on SCSI drives vs other types. SCSI is designed for 24/7 operation and more business operation. as far as speed goes I am not sure about the difference with the maxtors NCQ vs raptors.

Raid will increase disk performace by a good margin, this will translate into loading apllications and transfering data faster. If its a matter of bang for the buck. well that all depends on what you do with your system. Personally I move large amounts of data on a regular basis, so Raid makes sense for me, I have two raptors raid 0 and disk performance is exceptional, mtbfs of a raptor are close to SCSI without the need to purchase a controller card or a mobo with SCSI. I dont need fault tolerence because I keep current images of my boot drives on secondary drives.

As far as spending a ton of scratch for disks to raid, I dont thing thats the best performance/price thing you could do, then again depending on what you use your system for.

RAID does improve theoretical performance, however it does almost NOTHING to real world performance. I stand by what i said before.

-Kevin

 

[jose]

SQLtice, goto storage review for benchmarks. the linuxinsider doesn't even list what test were performed..

the only area that raid 0 raptors beat a scsi drive is sustained thruput....

None of the articles compared raptors to Fujistu MAS or Atlas 15k drives.

Regards,
Jose

 

[ribbon13]

Get a 36gb 15krpm scsi for boot/os/page and a large Seagate SATA drive for storage. Workstation != Maxtor ATAs of any sort

 

[jamesbond007]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
RAID is not for the average consumer. You probably wont see many benefits from it. If you are really looking for a speed boost make the move to SCSI.

As for the Maxtors, they really only shine if you have a motherboard that suppors NCQ (Nforce 4, Intel Chipsets). Even then the Seagate HDD are much better quality. The Raptors would be an utter waste of money. What are you going to be doing on this system that requires RAID? Like i said, its an utter waste of money.

If you really want to though, they will be about the same speed, however RAID 5 allows for fault tolerance so you reduce your risk of HDD failure due to RAID by a lot.

Again, if you really need/want the performance boost get SCSI. Otherwise just get a large Seagate Barracuda drive, or a WD Caviar and be done with it.

-Kevin

Yep, I concurr with everything here!

 

Originally posted by: S0Lstice

Originally posted by: jose
I'd have to agree w/ Gamingphreek and disagree w/ SQLstice.... I've used scsi since 1989, it is soo much faster/responsive than ide . it's not even a comparison.
As for raid 0 raptors, they don't compare anywhere near the seek time that you will get w/ a 15k scsi drive.

Regards,
Jose

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34202.html

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=x15vs740gd&page=1

quote from review:

It?s hard to recommend the Cheetah X15.3 right now ? since the Western Digital Raptor really does come close to the Cheetah in terms of disk performance, and costs so much less. The Raptor runs quieter and cooler, and is much less expensive.

I can notice a difference loading games and xp with raid0 vs just using a single raptor.