LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksIs it worth to raid? take a look
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/sho...tml?i=2101&p=1
Is it worth to raid? take a look
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/sho...tml?i=2101&p=1
yea I've read it already.. good article
its exactly what intelligent people have known since raid started being implemented...
I've met people who thought they'd get double the FPS in CS if they ran thier harddrives in raid-0 ... I mean.. how stupid can you be?
i think you miss the point with this article, they are showing you figures, people who run raid configs are not only doing it for these figures, but the BRAGing ability to say they have got a high spec system.
I'd like to see them do some tests on what Raid was meant to do and actually do something like Video editing, Database work or something where more than a few megabytes of data is transfered.
Games don't generally need raid you are quite correct, but in things where you need to write a lot of data to disk as the above things i've stated raid is absolutely essential.
I raid my system because, i work in IT, i love to work with technology and yes raid 0 array is a bragging right to some extent, but I also develop on this box, its got my whole development system on it and when i'm trashing stuff raid 0 takes the pain away.
TiG
-- Hexus Meets Rock! --
Indeed.Originally Posted by TiG
The article reads along the lines of "Why you dont need a Watercooled AMD 3800XP 64bit machine for web-browsing"
For the average PC world user, RAID is pointless. The power users will see the advantages of it.
There UT2004 figures seem a bit off though (im running RAID 0, and i swear its faster than that). Ill do some of my own testing tomrrow.
as tig said where was the video editing etc?
also why didnt they do a raid setup of some normal desktop drives rather than top of the range ones also?!? tbh i wouldnt expect to see a huge leap in raiding the raptors however raiding a normal drive i would expect a noticable increase
quite a poor article really
What they should have done is RAID a couple of normal mid range 120-160GB SATA disks and compare the speeds to a single 74GB Raptor. That would be a very interesting comparison. It's also a shame that they didn't use a board with an ICH6 and hence command queueing.
I was surprised that the game level loading wasn't affected by the RAID though. Since that's really the only time I ever get annoyed by the wait for data to load, I might reconsider whether it's worth my while spending a load of money on a RAID array.
Rich :¬)
My system with 2 x 36GB Raptors leaves my mates for dust when loading various games at lan parties. All have similar systems with 512MB ram with 1 HD etc (My previous 2 x 120GB WD drives also did the same). My housemate has 2 x WD800JB's in his in raid 0 and I find his machine to be 'just behind mine' in the loading stakes.
Before I bought my last raid array 2 x 120GB WD1200JB's, I had just one WD1200JB drive - I found games to load noticeably slower and the system not quite as 'sharp' as when using 2 drives in a RAID array.
I do agree that the article is inconclusive.
Last edited by Rabs; 04-07-2004 at 03:05 PM.
I dont raid my drives, i raid them for simplicity.
I find it much easier to work with a single 230gig partition than 2x120...
RAID-1!
my server wubs its lovely failsafe RAID-1 setup
Pah! Raid starts with hardware controller and should end in a number 5.
Seriously though, it does concern me that people associate raid 0 with speed. I tend to associate it loss of data and the question "you do have a backup right?"
Can't wait for Hotswap SATA racks to start reaching sensible levels.
Hmmmmm terabyte storage....
I wouldnt mind raid5 (mirroring?) for my storage drive - wait, what storage drive? yes the dead one
Edit - that remeinds me, I should reamke my sig, sometime...
raid 1 is mirroring
raid 5 is striped data with mixed parity
Chances are though, anyone thats got the brains to set up a RAID 0 array and install a OS on it, will know about the advantages and disadvantages of it.
If they dont, its their own fault.
I use RAID 0, but then again, if either of these drives were to fail, they dont contain anything i cant afford to loose. It would just be an annoyance to get a new one and rebuild it from scratch.
I swear my friends machine with two 160gig drives in RAID 0 loads games loads faster than mine without raid. As everyone has said though videoedeting and the like really see the benefit of the extra speed. Not a great article IMHO.
NES, SNES, N64, GameCube, Wii, GBA, DS, PSone, PS2, PSP, PS3 60gb, XBOX, XBOX 360, Master System, Game Gear, Mega Drive, Saturn, Dreamcast, PC Engine, Neo Geo CD
Raid 5 starts in £100's of pounds and overkill for a home system...
Kez's next system will feature three 80GB Barracuda's (of which I have two already) in RAID 5.
Sorry mate, but even my home systems have to kick arse.
PHP Code:$s = new signature();
$s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display();
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
