RAID 0

[octopus41092]

What is the actual increase in performance when using RAID 0? Also, if I were to switch to using RAID 0 would I have to reformat my computer? I am currently running Vista Ultimate 64-bit.

 

[Zap]

Increase in performance depends on your usage patterns. In simple terms you get anywhere from 0-100% increase.

Yes, you will have to reformat/reinstall.

 

[darkenedsoul]

Image your system with some imaging software (I use Acronis) before reformatting unless you don't care about the reinstall. Also I recommend you get some imaging softare because with RAID 0 you have no redundancy, i.e. you lose a drive you lost your whole system compared to running RAID 1 (mirroring) or RAID 5 (striping with parity, req's 3 HDD's minimal but you can still boot/operate if you lose a disk). I run RAID 0 on my DAW and RAID 1 on my main system due to logging into work with it and general purpose system (games, email, photoshop, etc...).

Mike

 

[postmortemIA]

In intel's case, 'Intel® Matrix Storage Manager' software will let you create RAID0 array without re installation, but RAID controller has to be already enabled.

Actual performance gain? "some" is best answer there is, you will gain increased sequential reads/writes.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: Zap
Increase in performance depends on your usage patterns. In simple terms you get anywhere from 0-100% increase.

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
Actual performance gain? "some" is best answer there is, you will gain increased sequential reads/writes.

In normal desktop usage, very little benefit at all (probably not noticeable in most apps).
In server applications, highly noticeable.
What do you do with your system?

Originally posted by: darkenedsoul
Also I recommend you get some imaging softare because with RAID 0 you have no redundancy, i.e. you lose a drive you lost your whole system

...and here's why we usually tell people to avoid raid0 for home use. If you set up a two-disk array and either disk fails your whole array is gone (remember, raid0 works by writing each file across both drives so you are only left with fragments if one drive fails). Also, if you are going to do raid0, do yourself a favor and get a discrete raid controller. Performance is better with these "hardware" controllers and you can also migrate the raid array to another computer if you decide to upgrade or have to replace a failed motherboard (otherwise, what do you do when you want/need a new motherboard?).

 

[darkenedsoul]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
In intel's case, 'Intel® Matrix Storage Manager' software will let you create RAID0 array without re installation, but RAID controller has to be already enabled.

Actual performance gain? "some" is best answer there is, you will gain increased sequential reads/writes.

I'll allow you to go from non-RAID to RAID 0 on the fly providing you have the 2nd matching disk installed and formatted? That's news to me, but in a good way if this is the case. I'll have to keep that in mind for future builds. But always image your HD, especially in a RAID 0 configuration, you lose a disk, you lose it all, no mirror of one of the drives.

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: darkenedsoul

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
In intel's case, 'Intel® Matrix Storage Manager' software will let you create RAID0 array without re installation, but RAID controller has to be already enabled.

Actual performance gain? "some" is best answer there is, you will gain increased sequential reads/writes.

I'll allow you to go from non-RAID to RAID 0 on the fly providing you have the 2nd matching disk installed and formatted? That's news to me, but in a good way if this is the case. I'll have to keep that in mind for future builds. But always image your HD, especially in a RAID 0 configuration, you lose a disk, you lose it all, no mirror of one of the drives.

I've used that feature since ICH5R and that was their first RAID chipset. It works just as you described. You just select to where RAID will be expanded, it does its thing within Windows for about 1/2 hour, you reboot and it is done.

 

[pugh]

If you are going to go the RAID route. Do yourself a favor and use a hardware controller and save yourself the headaches so many encounter.

 

[darkenedsoul]

Originally posted by: pugh
If you are going to go the RAID route. Do yourself a favor and use a hardware controller and save yourself the headaches so many encounter.

With that in mind, if you do use image software ensure you get the latest from the vendor (Acronis will send you a pointer to an iso image to get and re-burn for a bootable disc) that supports software RAID, i.e. Intel stuff. I'm not sure what AMD does but I'd assume it's Intel on those mobo's as well. If you can afford a HW controller you may have better luck with Ubuntu as it doesn't like fake/software RAID as they call it...I gave up when I ran into that with Ubuntu and just use VMware when I want to do some stuff in Linux.....maybe one day they'll include the drives/support for the Intel chipset. Here's hoping!

Mike