-
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.
Raptor vs. Raid 0
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
imported_Baloo
Golden Member
Uh oh, did those SR non-RAID 0 goonies migrate to here? I have been using RAID 0 for years, had the original fast trak 100 raid when they first came out. There is a very clear speed gain from raid 0. I have never had an array fail, and I ran several generations of those IBM Deskstar GXP's in RAID 0( those drives, by the way, are still in use today on various family members PC's as single drives). RAID Zero always wins. Go back to that SR article and read thru the bias and you will see RAID 0 wins. It's silly to even qeustion this anymore what with all the benchamrks comparision at various sites comparing sngle drives to raid 0 arrays. In a properly set up PC, the chances of data corruption is still very small even in a raid 0 array. Ok, maybe it takes guts to try it out and take the risk. In that case, I am more gutsy than some of you.
QueBert
Lifer
chance of corruption is small eh?? Maybe it's just karma but I have problems with single HDs going bad. Had a Seagate & 2 WD's die within 12 months of one another, and they were all at most a year old. Raid 0 would horrify me. Maybe if I can pinpoint why my luck with HD's in general is so bad. I would say without some sort of backup, Raid 0 is pushing your luck.
QueBert
Lifer
never go back? my Raptor was LOUD AS HELL, I replaced it with a 7200.10 which is almost as fast across the board is 4x as big and half the price. Not to mention it's whisper quiet. Maybe my ears are sensitive but my PC is by my bed and the noise a Raptor makes when seeking was pretty noticeable. Sure it was fast, hell it was nice, but for almost 200 bucks for 74 gigs (when I bought it) I don't see what all the fuss is about.
I have yet to see any significant performance benchmark increase in things other than encoding when using RAID 0.
I am not talking about all the synthetic benchmarks...just real world performance.
If I was a massive encoder and time was critical, I might consider RAID 0. If I was a major gamer and loading to the map 1 second before everyone else was critical I would consider a raptor. However, neither of these are that "mission critical" to me so I pass on both.
I am not talking about all the synthetic benchmarks...just real world performance.
If I was a massive encoder and time was critical, I might consider RAID 0. If I was a major gamer and loading to the map 1 second before everyone else was critical I would consider a raptor. However, neither of these are that "mission critical" to me so I pass on both.
When I got my new computer I did a test, install Vista on Raid-0 (Two Seagate 320GB 7200.10) and also install Vista on regular IDE Maxtor 250GB 7200rpm Drive. It's not a side by side comparison obviously but when using the desktop on raid-0 it just seems more responsive & fluid. It could be just in my head, but it seems there were some moments of lag or the mouse having the busy circle signal on the IDE for a few seconds where as in the same situation you wouldn't have it on the raid-0. Also I copy a lot of files over from a file server and the raid-0 was much faster there. Little quirks here & there makes raid-0 seem faster, it wouldn't bother most people but it bothers me so I just use raid-0 and have a 500GB external harddrive for backup.
MrBelvedere
Member
I guess the main question here i should be asking is. My current setup is 2x250gb WD SATAs in raid0. If you could get a 74gb raptor (barely used) for $50 would you get it?
Well, I think many people who go RAID 0 have high performance rigs where they're looking to gain more performance anywhere possible. The bottleneck for those people is going to be the HDD every time, so gaining even marginal benefits is going to be worth it for those people.
I had a RAID 0 array on a hardware PCI card in my last rig, but passed on RAID this time around. The Raptor 150GB is faster than my old 2x8MB 7200rpm array and RAID with an AIB had its own set of headaches to deal with. For those arguing price to performance, sure, going with a bigger drive makes more sense, but I'm one of those people who never needs mass amounts of storage on my main rig. I just toss stuff that I want to backup or store on my older rigs which become file servers and keep my main rig streamlined for performance.
But back to the OP's question, if you want a good mix of performance/storage, maybe look at a Raptor 150GB for OS/apps and a larger 16GB 7200rpm for storage. Best balance of performance/reliability at this point, imo.
I had a RAID 0 array on a hardware PCI card in my last rig, but passed on RAID this time around. The Raptor 150GB is faster than my old 2x8MB 7200rpm array and RAID with an AIB had its own set of headaches to deal with. For those arguing price to performance, sure, going with a bigger drive makes more sense, but I'm one of those people who never needs mass amounts of storage on my main rig. I just toss stuff that I want to backup or store on my older rigs which become file servers and keep my main rig streamlined for performance.
But back to the OP's question, if you want a good mix of performance/storage, maybe look at a Raptor 150GB for OS/apps and a larger 16GB 7200rpm for storage. Best balance of performance/reliability at this point, imo.
pcslookout
Lifer
Just buy one 150 gig Raptor and be very happy!
No, you just posted a benchmark.
What a surprise, a Raptor is barely faster than a 500GB drive in real applications.
Shocking, RAID 0 offers little real-world performance over a single drive.
If you were really worried about shaving precious "seconds" off your day with RAID 0 and a Raptor, why waste so much time arguing on a forum?
postmortemIA
Diamond Member
Game load time is hardly a real world app.. because it is not bottlenecked by hard disk, which that test shows. You could have shown that SUPERPI doesn't benefit from Raptor at all.. maybe you'd even managet o show how Raptor makes your SUPERPI score worse.
There's something called PCMark05
There's test in it called "Windows XP start up time"
check it out, don't look only for favorable tests.. or ask Raptor users do they see loading XP screen at all.
In the mean time, don't open two programs at same time 🙂)
KingGheedora
Diamond Member
10 raptors? What controller are you using?
Old Hippie
Diamond Member
You really have some nice toys! :thumbsup:
Is this for work or personal? Just wondering, as I muse over my lowly ARC-1220. 🙂
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
