I have two 74 gb raptors in raid 0 on a core 2 build and love the payoff in performance. I do some video work and some gaming. I see a real life, every day difference.
Let me point out something that most anti-raid0 envangelist posters leave out ... working with video on your pc will be more common in the future. I just encode TIVO and dvd files to divx/xvid for archival and future home theater purposes right now, which if you don't do yet ... you will. Video capture for home movies or editing and sharing the digital cam files, HD video capture ... there is likely a lot of video work in your pc's future even if its 'just a gamer' now. Just imagine the need for encoding once the world goes HD and the home terabyte is already crowded. How did you think all that stuff gets on youtube? Yeah, that's not the future knocking on your door ... honest.
So if you have the money to burn and are going for bleeding edge, do it. The Hitachi isn't going to give you the 7-8ms access times and bandwidth of raptors in raid0 period. Price per gb is meaningless if price isn't a consideration. Leave the storage to the storage drives and the performance to the performance drives. I have a disk image of the OS so who cares if one dies I mean I seriously don't get how that is a negative. Treat your raid0 as a system drive, take the occasional image, and you'll be gtg.
Let me point out something that most anti-raid0 envangelist posters leave out ... working with video on your pc will be more common in the future. I just encode TIVO and dvd files to divx/xvid for archival and future home theater purposes right now, which if you don't do yet ... you will. Video capture for home movies or editing and sharing the digital cam files, HD video capture ... there is likely a lot of video work in your pc's future even if its 'just a gamer' now. Just imagine the need for encoding once the world goes HD and the home terabyte is already crowded. How did you think all that stuff gets on youtube? Yeah, that's not the future knocking on your door ... honest.
So if you have the money to burn and are going for bleeding edge, do it. The Hitachi isn't going to give you the 7-8ms access times and bandwidth of raptors in raid0 period. Price per gb is meaningless if price isn't a consideration. Leave the storage to the storage drives and the performance to the performance drives. I have a disk image of the OS so who cares if one dies I mean I seriously don't get how that is a negative. Treat your raid0 as a system drive, take the occasional image, and you'll be gtg.
ya but realisticly how often does it actually happen or you taking about like 3+ years down the road or something that can happen even when you buy it or what we looking at or is this just a chance that this could happen? in other words what he is talking about is it blown out of poportion or something to seriously worry about?
Tacos, what you say rings the truth. Raid and not Raid are not the same and cannot be compared as such. But I think most peeps who use or wish to try Raid 0 do not view Raid as a Redundant Array of Independent Discs, but rather as 'two hard drives are faster than one', which is true. Obvious to anyone who has data they wish to keep that Raid 0 is an apple, just as to someone who has a couple drives in Raid 0 just for games, he has oranges. lol
I personally don't trust a single large drive any more than I trust a Raid array drive, whether it be 0 or not. I have had more than one drive up and die, erm, more often just lose it's mbr and get flaky. So, to speak of data integrity, single drives IMO are no better than Raid 0 if the term is "die" as in hardware failure.
Now, you may be speaking of "die" as in "my stupid array just got fooked again", so, heh heh, Raid 0 has a tendency to do, maybe sometimes lol.
I think the dead horse is being kicked over and over again because when John Doe neighbor comes to my house, and sees how fast maybe a game loads up, he says "wow, what's under the hood". I say this and that, Raid 0. Or he reads something online. Either way, his interest has been pricked. So off he goes with a general assumption that 'two drives are better than one'. And this is primarily, IMO, because most average users who get a little bit adventuresome, will not geek out for 2 weeks reading white papers on the different Raid levels, much less spend another 2 weeks studying what latency or seek time is. Most don't even get so far as to really comprehend that when some benchmark app says "220mbsec" that it is usually not a real world value, that is manipulated. They see ATA133 as "133mb/sec".
My experience anyway with fixing and building puters is that they learn just a little tiny bit, lose interest, and leave it at that. Sometimes you get teh neighber who asks a LOT of questions and then does some research and then gives me a great tidbit of data that I had not seen before, but I bet that is 1 in 50 that goes to that level.
my 2 cents on a perhaps well trodden topic, but one still of great interest to many upgraders.
later.
I personally don't trust a single large drive any more than I trust a Raid array drive, whether it be 0 or not. I have had more than one drive up and die, erm, more often just lose it's mbr and get flaky. So, to speak of data integrity, single drives IMO are no better than Raid 0 if the term is "die" as in hardware failure.
Now, you may be speaking of "die" as in "my stupid array just got fooked again", so, heh heh, Raid 0 has a tendency to do, maybe sometimes lol.
I think the dead horse is being kicked over and over again because when John Doe neighbor comes to my house, and sees how fast maybe a game loads up, he says "wow, what's under the hood". I say this and that, Raid 0. Or he reads something online. Either way, his interest has been pricked. So off he goes with a general assumption that 'two drives are better than one'. And this is primarily, IMO, because most average users who get a little bit adventuresome, will not geek out for 2 weeks reading white papers on the different Raid levels, much less spend another 2 weeks studying what latency or seek time is. Most don't even get so far as to really comprehend that when some benchmark app says "220mbsec" that it is usually not a real world value, that is manipulated. They see ATA133 as "133mb/sec".
My experience anyway with fixing and building puters is that they learn just a little tiny bit, lose interest, and leave it at that. Sometimes you get teh neighber who asks a LOT of questions and then does some research and then gives me a great tidbit of data that I had not seen before, but I bet that is 1 in 50 that goes to that level.
my 2 cents on a perhaps well trodden topic, but one still of great interest to many upgraders.
later.
Well, say you put two drives in Raid 0. Statistically, the chance of one failing rises about 75% for each additional drive. A lot of drives tend to fail in their first year of use, after that, the chances of a failure decrease until around the 5 year mark, when it starts to rise again. It's certainly less common than it has been, but it's definately something you want to keep in mind. I'd never use RAID0 as a system drive. Automatic back-ups help minimize the risk.
choirbass
Distinguished
- Dec 14, 2005
- 1,586
- 0
- 19,780
i would think that (at least for raptors), that the built in heatsinks, and raff vibration compensation (among other things), would put it at 'least' on par with other consumer 7200s for expected reliability?, such the 1TB hitachi for example (im not sure which technologies the hitachi hdd has of its own though)
we all know hdds do fail, but isnt the likelyhood of some hdds failing less than others?, such as the difference between consumer hdds, and professional?
we all know hdds do fail, but isnt the likelyhood of some hdds failing less than others?, such as the difference between consumer hdds, and professional?
choirbass
Distinguished
- Dec 14, 2005
- 1,586
- 0
- 19,780
...yeah, after reading that, it did appear that a lot of those qualities were moot then... ...from personal experience though, none of the 5 raptors i have, have exhibited any signs of failure or faultiness throughout the years i purchased them (and most users dont complain about raptors failing either, for those that do have them)... yet every other brand of [consumer] hdds weve purchased have had numerous failures... ..an average of about 1 failure per year occurs, were lucky when theres not... no failures can then be considered a 'good year' lol
its pretty rare, even on here, to read about someones raptor failing (or being DOA even so to speak)... and for the price of a raptor, if there were more failures, youd be certain to hear more complaints like that about them (plus theres a 5 year warranty, so IF one did happen to fail in that period, you can always RMA it, problem solved)
its pretty rare, even on here, to read about someones raptor failing (or being DOA even so to speak)... and for the price of a raptor, if there were more failures, youd be certain to hear more complaints like that about them (plus theres a 5 year warranty, so IF one did happen to fail in that period, you can always RMA it, problem solved)
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question User RX 580 8gb red devil powercolor, asking original BIOS- Started by PizzaInGame
- Replies: 5
-
-
-
News Microsoft updates Windows 11 24H2 requirements, CPU must support SSE4.2 or the OS will not boot- Started by Admin
- Replies: 16
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram