Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Raid 0+1 v's Raid 5 - opinions and real world results ?

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    10
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Raid 0+1 v's Raid 5 - opinions and real world results ?

    I'm looking at upgrading and this could play a bit role in what motherboard and drives I get.

    The DFI DR series have the Sil' SATA chipset that offers Raid 5 (though I believe it is Sata1 - 150 rather than Sata2 - 300). I could theoretically get this and stick 3 drives on it (minimum for raid5) and get striping with parity, which is generally agreed to be the best variant of Raid.

    The lesser boards I am looking at , do have the option Raid 0+1. Does anyone have experience of this ? What sort of real worls results did you have if you did or do use it ?

    Drive wise, I guess I'd be looking at 2 raptors in raid 0+1 or 3 large 7200rpm 16mb cache drives in raid 5. Similar price but obviously a large difference in storage capacity.

    Thanks
    mj

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    351
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    9 times in 9 posts
    • nimbu's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M3N78-EMH
      • CPU:
      • AMD 4050e
      • Memory:
      • 4GB (2x2GB) Cosair XMS DDR2
      • Storage:
      • 30GB Samsung SSD : 250GB Seagate ES
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 9800GT
      • PSU:
      • Hyper Type R 550W Modular
      • Case:
      • Antec P180 Mini
    Generally the onboard RAID 5 offerings are actually done through software rather then hardware, and thus load your CPU.

    Write performance will be poor. I cant remember what read performace is like tbh.

    If you really want to go RAID 5, you should seriously invest in a dedicated hardware controller.
    MAIN BOX: 4200+ @2.75 : Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe: XP120 + Papst: 2Gb Mushkin Redline PC4000: 512MB 7950GT: 2x36GB WD Raptors in RAID 0:WD 420GB : NEC DVDR/RW: All Wrapped up in a Antec P180



  3. #3
    www.5lab.co.uk
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6,406
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    from what i knew a couple of years ago (might well still be true) a separate controller is best..

    0+1 needs 4 drives, and gives you the capacity of 2, the speed of double one drive. raid 5 with n drives (n>2) gives you the capacity of n-1 drives, the speed of (n-1)x the speed of one drive, and resilliance.

    0+1 gives you slightly more resiliance (in case 2 drives die) but the chances of this happening are pretty slim, and if 2 particular drives die, you'd still loose the array...

    disclaimer : may be wrong
    hughlunnon@yahoo.com | I have sigs turned off..

  4. #4
    Nox
    Nox is offline
    Vorsprung durch Technik
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    2,023
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts
    • Nox's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Yes
      • CPU:
      • Yes
      • Memory:
      • Yes
      • Storage:
      • Yes
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Yes
      • PSU:
      • Yes
      • Case:
      • Yes
      • Monitor(s):
      • Yes
      • Internet:
      • Yes
    Real world performance? Not a lot. Raid 5 will have slower write performance if using the onboard controller. Striping will be faster much faster according to benchmark progs, but you won't notice that much, and mirroring is great for stuff if a single drive goes, but won't protect you if you are burgled or your computer is fried by lightning.

    Nox

  5. #5
    Lovely chap dangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    8,385
    Thanks
    407
    Thanked
    449 times in 331 posts
    • dangel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • See My Sig
      • CPU:
      • See My Sig
      • Memory:
      • See My Sig
      • Storage:
      • See My Sig
      • Graphics card(s):
      • See My Sig
      • PSU:
      • See My Sig
      • Case:
      • See My Sig
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • See My Sig
      • Internet:
      • 60mbit Sky LLU
    With all the posts on how great hardware RAID is compared to onboard stuff - what's a good one to go for? All i'd need is two-channel, maybe four if afordable, and i'd prolly stick with striped.

    Recommendations?
    System 001: Maximus VII Formula, 4790k i7, RTX 2080ti FE (incoming), 16GIG Corsair Vengence DDR3 RAM CL9, Corsair HX1000, ROG SWIFT PG278Q , SSDs, Antec 1200 case, All watercooled. [main]
    System 002: A8 3850 APU, ASUS uATX FM1A75 MB, 4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3, Corsair psu, OCZ Agility 3, 1TB F3, Dell 2001FP 20" LCD, £7's worth of 5.1 speakers (they rock) Windows 7 x64[wife/server]
    System 003: AsRock MB, APU, 8 GIG Corsair, Silverstone HTPC case, stock cooler, GT220 1gbDDR3, WD Green 3TB, Kingston 40gb SSD, MCE Remote, Panasonic 50" LCD (87BDX) via HDMI Windows 8.1.1 (32) [media centre]
    System 004: Asus UL50AT Intel Core 2 Duo,4GB, Intel Gen 2 80GB SSD, Win 8.1.1 x64 [no justification]
    System 005: HP Proliant N40L Microserver, 4x2TB drives, fan mod, Pico PSU mod, Win7 x86 [file server]
    System 006: Dell Optiplex 9010, i7, 8gb, 128gb Samsung 830 x 2 (boot and VM drive), 1TB WD HDD, ATI something, Windows 8.1.1 x64 RTM [work]


  6. #6
    YUKIKAZE arthurleung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    3,280
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked
    88 times in 83 posts
    • arthurleung's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5E (Rampage Formula 0902)
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 3.6Ghz 1.2V
      • Memory:
      • A-Data DDR2-800 2x2GB CL4
      • Storage:
      • 4x1TB WD1000FYPS @ RAID5 3Ware 9500S-8 / 3x 1TB Samsung Ecogreen F2
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GeCube HD4870 512MB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair VX450
      • Case:
      • Antec P180
      • Operating System:
      • Windows Server 2008 Standard
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell Ultrasharp 2709W + 2001FP
      • Internet:
      • Be*Unlimited 20Mbps
    RAID0,1 will be pretty much the same for both high-end and low-end cards.

    RAID5,6 is what price matters. Cheap software cards/chips use software to handle raid (and its not well-written as well) So they are both slow, and not very reliable. If you somehow break the driver / raid table you may lose data in the worse case scenario. Even if the data survived you'll have some hard time recovering it through software.

    Not to mention the performance of software RAID5 is VERY SLOW

    I tried making a RAID5 on SIL3114 with 4x Hitachi SATA drives, left them overnight to make sure its init-ed completely. I copy 200GB of files through network to the disks. It started off at 76MB/s (limited by network) then after 5 minutes it drop to 300KB/s. Something must have been broken I thought. After that I think, slow write is fine, I only need fast read. I then copy the file to another drive, with just 3G of files the transfer said it will take 45 minutes! I immediately erased the array and go back to independent disks.

    It is just not worth the trouble going software RAID5 (especially on a SIL3114)
    Workstation 1: Intel i7 950 @ 3.8Ghz / X58 / 12GB DDR3-1600 / HD4870 512MB / Antec P180
    Workstation 2: Intel C2Q Q9550 @ 3.6Ghz / X38 / 4GB DDR2-800 / 8400GS 512MB / Open Air
    Workstation 3: Intel Xeon X3350 @ 3.2Ghz / P35 / 4GB DDR2-800 / HD4770 512MB / Shuttle SP35P2
    HTPC: AMD Athlon X4 620 @ 2.6Ghz / 780G / 4GB DDR2-1000 / Antec Mini P180 White
    Mobile Workstation: Intel C2D T8300 @ 2.4Ghz / GM965 / 3GB DDR2-667 / DELL Inspiron 1525 / 6+6+9 Cell Battery

    Display (Monitor): DELL Ultrasharp 2709W + DELL Ultrasharp 2001FP
    Display (Projector): Epson TW-3500 1080p
    Speakers: Creative Megaworks THX550 5.1
    Headphones: Etymotic hf2 / Ultimate Ears Triple.fi 10 Pro

    Storage: 8x2TB Hitachi @ DELL PERC 6/i RAID6 / 13TB Non-RAID Across 12 HDDs
    Consoles: PS3 Slim 120GB / Xbox 360 Arcade 20GB / PS2

  7. #7
    Seething Cauldron of Hatred TheAnimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    17,154
    Thanks
    802
    Thanked
    2,151 times in 1,407 posts
    whilst i agree software RAIDs are stupid, espesually when you've got enough money for 5 drives, i feal i should share some good experiances, under NT, its piss easy to set up (as long as you don't want windows running of the virtual RAID drive, this is understably more difficult to set up, but possible).

    Also under BSD, on BSD with a dual xeon neccona's I found the performance to be about 10-20% worse than with my hardware RAID card (which at the time i thought might of been making my instabilities). NT i found to be slightly slower at writes, but faster at reads, go figure, i didn't look at how much RAM it was using as a cache, as it was more an experiment.

    Software RAIDs can be done, but their even more easy to trash.

    with RAIDs, if you think YOUR more likely to loose data than your HDD, dont bother with a pairty based RAID!
    throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)

  8. #8
    Anthropomorphic Personification shaithis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Last Aerie
    Posts
    10,857
    Thanks
    645
    Thanked
    872 times in 736 posts
    • shaithis's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77 WS
      • CPU:
      • i7 3770k @ 4.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 32GB HyperX 1866
      • Storage:
      • Lots!
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Fury X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850
      • Case:
      • Corsair 600T (White)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x Dell 3007
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb Fibre
    Quote Originally Posted by dangel
    With all the posts on how great hardware RAID is compared to onboard stuff - what's a good one to go for? All i'd need is two-channel, maybe four if afordable, and i'd prolly stick with striped.

    Recommendations?
    3Ware or Areca...both start at around 200-250ukp. You do get what you pay for though
    Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
    HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
    HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
    Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
    NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
    Laptop: Dell Precision 5510 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: Huawei P30 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM14 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    10
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnimus
    whilst i agree software RAIDs are stupid, espesually when you've got enough money for 5 drives, i feal i should share some good experiances, under NT, its piss easy to set up (as long as you don't want windows running of the virtual RAID drive, this is understably more difficult to set up, but possible).

    Also under BSD, on BSD with a dual xeon neccona's I found the performance to be about 10-20% worse than with my hardware RAID card (which at the time i thought might of been making my instabilities). NT i found to be slightly slower at writes, but faster at reads, go figure, i didn't look at how much RAM it was using as a cache, as it was more an experiment.

    Software RAIDs can be done, but their even more easy to trash.

    with RAIDs, if you think YOUR more likely to loose data than your HDD, dont bother with a pairty based RAID!
    You mean the built in striping (raid 0) and striping with parity (raid 5) that NT had in drive manager ? I used to us ethat and never had a problem. Moved onto Win2k and for some reason the second option was gone - or I couldn't get it to work. I ended up going for plain striping of 4 scsi disks (2*2) but as you say you can't do the system drive.

    mj

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •