RAID 0 ....... is it worth it?

[Whizzard9992]

Hello

Can you give me your 3d mark05 cpu score. i have a faster cpu but i do not receive the score you are having. I do not have sli setup,however . i believe your sli setup give your score a boost. so i want to know the scores of your cpu. If possible , please share them with me.

Bye.

RAID shouldn't affect 3dmark scores unless you don't have enough RAM to run the benches.

You'll see the demos load faster, but the scores won't change. The benches should be fully loaded into memory before the benchmarks run.

 

[7_vii_7]

Well you guys have more than answered my question. The hard drive will be here tomorrow and I will RAID 0 both of the drives on a Windows XP Pro Sp2 OS.. and soon Linux ... thanks guys!

 

[Whizzard9992]

Well you guys have more than answered my question. The hard drive will be here tomorrow and I will RAID 0 both of the drives on a Windows XP Pro Sp2 OS.. and soon Linux ... thanks guys!

NOTE: Most RAID hardware requires both drives to be the same Brand / Model. Software RAID 0 probably won't increase your speed.

Also note that when you create the RAID array, you will lose all of the data that's already on the drives, so make sure you have everything backed up.

Good luck!

 

[Whizzard9992]

Can't say I've noticed that much difference... don't know why you do and I don't. The only true difference I noticed is when it crashed. Windows loads the same, btw. You might see a difference in game loading but no 66% that's for sure.

RAID benchmark

Normally ~2 seconds in loading on Raptors in RAID over non-RAID. Wow that's a lot of extra sitting there time. QUOTE "As to how Raid-0 stacks up against a single Raptor, the only difference is in the benchmark scores - other then that, in real world use there is NO REAL IMPROVEMENT in load up times."

I hear ya. What controller/drives are you using? What stripe size are you using?

Content Creation (i.e. Browsing the web) is an area where you'll also see improvement. No matter how fast your internet connection is, you have to save it to the drive before you can see it.

Also, you're going RAID 0 versus a raptor. Raptors offer blazing speeds. Still, though, in day-to-day use, I've found computers with RAID 0 to be much more responsive, especially when multi-tasking.

 

[htoon]

Hello

Can you give me your 3d mark05 cpu score. i have a faster cpu but i do not receive the score you are having. I do not have sli setup,however . i believe your sli setup give your score a boost. so i want to know the scores of your cpu. If possible , please share them with me.

Bye.

RAID shouldn't affect 3dmark scores unless you don't have enough RAM to run the benches.

You'll see the demos load faster, but the scores won't change. The benches should be fully loaded into memory before the benchmarks run.

that is not what i am asking. i am asking his cpu scores.

 

[michaelahess]

Very right on!

I have a highpoint 2320 (I'm sure you regulars are getting sick of hearing about it) with 4 320's and it's got comparable rights compared to my RAID0, a bit slower, the reads are certainly faster than a single disk but nowhere near the RAID0's.

 

[222Doc]

well you must have something slowing your start up times to make two raptors in raid0 not feel like we are comparing a UGO and a LS7 corvet.

we have 4 Northys running here all the same set up about i say about because they are all OCed. that a side . this pc a 2.4 @ 3.2 2raptors loads windows after post in under 4 seconds 8O the pc next to it same mobo same 2.4@ 3.2 but witha single wd 120gig that pc takes over 17 seconds. both pcs have 2 gigs ram.

next advantage if you are a gamer loading maps. BF2 or Oblvion you will see why a LS7 vet is not a UGO.

as for reliabilty, yea there is a 2x chance of data lose over a single drive. Not that much since MOST data is not lost do to a hard drive failing more likly a person to curupt windows get a virus etc..... how many have had to reformat ? did you replace your Hd? no

for me one of the best up grades i ever did

 

[Whizzard9992]

this pc a 2.4 @ 3.2 2raptors loads windows after post in under 4 seconds 8O

Keep in mind that when you see the blue bar for windows, it's initializing the HAL. i.e. The drivers determine how fast it loads during the splash screen. A fresh install with no drivers will usually only flash the splash screen for a second before GINA kicks in. Once you see the blue screen with an arrow, that's a good time to start menchmarking the RAID speed.

 

[michaelahess]

GINA = Graphical Identification and Authentication i.e. the login screen


For anyone who doesn't feel like googling it but still wants to know what Wizzard9992 is talking about. Slick usage btw, not everyday you can throw that acronym around

 

[Codesmith]

My OS is on a Raptor and my backup software has been updated to recognize my NF4 Nvidia Raid arrays.

I already have a 400 GB RAID 1 array for easy backups.

So I am open to purchasing a 2nd 74 GB Raptor if I see numbers that convince me I will definately feel the difference.

I am just waiting for someone to post a link to the benchmarks that are going to make me a believer.

PS I don't work with large files in ways that would benifit from RAID 0 so I need something showing that files will open faster, games will load faster ...

 

[vylo]

Question for you guys since it is already being asked.

I'm getting ready to build a new machine. I game frequently (FPS, RTS, MMO), and store a large amount of video files on my computer.

I plan on getting multiple hard drives, including a raptor with which to run my programs from.

Should I bother running 2 raptors in a RAID 0, or should I opt for more storage space?

Will the boost in performance warrant the extra trouble and risk, or will a raptor provide enough performance in itself?

 

[Whizzard9992]

My OS is on a Raptor and my backup software has been updated to recognize my NF4 Nvidia Raid arrays.

I already have a 400 GB RAID 1 array for easy backups.

So I am open to purchasing a 2nd 74 GB Raptor if I see numbers that convince me I will definately feel the difference.

I am just waiting for someone to post a link to the benchmarks that are going to make me a believer.

PS I don't work with large files in ways that would benifit from RAID 0 so I need something showing that files will open faster, games will load faster ...

RAID 0 probably won't (noticibly) affect games, unless there's a lot of loading (loading a stage in BF 2 for example). Even then, you need to make sure that you have a fast enough processor to chew through all of the data. Another consideration is bus speed. Some older RAID controllers ran on the PCI bus, which is a shared bus and is limited to 133MB/s. A lot of times that would limit the transfer speed. Most on-board RAID controllers that are not part of the southbridge sit on the PCI bus, and that will almost definately limit your RAID performance on a pair of raptors. (Intel Matrix and NF4 are southbridge, Silicon Image etc are not). It's possible the newer mobos will have the SI RAID chip on PCIe though.

Lastly, you need to make sure you have a decent controller. The NF4 chipset is known to have sub-par RAID performance (They might have addressed some of the issues with Firmware updates... I don't have NF4 so I don't keep track). Check THG's storage articles for a list of good peripheral controllers. An adaptec controller is expensive, but it will always give you top-notch performance if you can foot the bill.

There aren't a lot of real-world benches that will sell you on RAID 0. The synthetics are a great indicator of the difference between RAID and non-RAID. What you're doing is you're eliminating (or greatly reducing) the impact of the worst bottleneck in your computer, and that will impact just about everything you do to a varying degree. Games will see little benefit other than initial load times, P2P usually sees a huge throughput increase (Lots of seeking, huge files).

 

[Whizzard9992]

Question for you guys since it is already being asked.

I'm getting ready to build a new machine. I game frequently (FPS, RTS, MMO), and store a large amount of video files on my computer.

I plan on getting multiple hard drives, including a raptor with which to run my programs from.

Should I bother running 2 raptors in a RAID 0, or should I opt for more storage space?

Will the boost in performance warrant the extra trouble and risk, or will a raptor provide enough performance in itself?

I personally keep my Primary storage seperate from my archive storage; that way I get the best of both worlds.


@ Codesmith:

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2101

To put things in perspective, the performance gain from a Single Raptor to RAID 0 Raptors is greater than the performance gain of going from a regular drive to a Raptor.

If you noticed an increase in speed when you moved to your raptor, then you'll probably notice a difference if you go to RAID 0.

 

[Codesmith]

Have you read the articles conclusion?, Anantech was extreemly harsh.

I have read plenty of articles expressing dissapointment with RAID. What I want to read is a reputable review of two drives (perferably Raptors) in RAID 0 config that says I there is noticiable improvement and then back it up with "real world" benchmarks.

If you haven't gotten the hint by now, we'll spell it out for you: there is no place, and no need for a RAID-0 array on a desktop computer. The real world performance increases are negligible at best and the reduction in reliability, thanks to a halving of the mean time between failure, makes RAID-0 far from worth it on the desktop.

Bottom line: RAID-0 arrays will win you just about any benchmark, but they'll deliver virtually nothing more than that for real world desktop performance. That's just the cold hard truth.

 

[Whizzard9992]

Have you read the articles conclusion?, Anantech was extreemly harsh.

I have read plenty of articles expressing dissapointment with RAID. What I want to read is a reputable review of two drives (perferably Raptors) in RAID 0 config that says I there is noticiable improvement and then back it up with "real world" benchmarks.

If you haven't gotten the hint by now, we'll spell it out for you: there is no place, and no need for a RAID-0 array on a desktop computer. The real world performance increases are negligible at best and the reduction in reliability, thanks to a halving of the mean time between failure, makes RAID-0 far from worth it on the desktop.

Bottom line: RAID-0 arrays will win you just about any benchmark, but they'll deliver virtually nothing more than that for real world desktop performance. That's just the cold hard truth.

Actually I missed the conclusion.

I'm sure you can find articles out there supporting RAID, but even the numbers themselves speak for exactly what the performance difference is, aside from a reviewers opinion (my own included). You get more boost going from 1 Raptor to 2 on RAID than you get going from a 7200 to a raptor.

There's a difference between running synthetics on a couple of fresh installs, and using it on a day-to-day basis on a fragmented drive with 20 programs running in the background.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just saying I've always noticed a difference. That might just be me, tho. I can tell when a computer is lagging from a bottleneck (The little orange light on the computer helps, too 😉). I beat the bejeezus out of my computers, though. I also don't have a raptor: it's one thing to compare 2x7200 drives to a single, and something completely different when talking raptors.

 

[7_vii_7]

Well guys i just completed my RAID 0 with my two WD 160gb SATA II drives... and WOW what a differance.. it is so much faster to load everything. I had a tough time with the NVIDIA drivers.. so I went with SIL and that is working out just fine.


290gbs of pure power thanks!

 

[Whizzard9992]

Go read this before throwing your garbage around.

Did you google that yourself? Your parents must be proud...

I can google all day and find an online article to prove any point I want: for both sides of an argument.

RAID multitasks better than single drives, and that's where users really notice the difference. 10k or 7200 might affect benchmarks, but with what users notice - when the computer lags waiting for IO time - RAID shines.

Well guys i just completed my RAID 0 with my two WD 160gb SATA II drives... and WOW what a differance..

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just saying I've always noticed a difference. That might just be me, tho.

So go easy.

 

[Codesmith]

Anandtech is one of the best, most professional review sites, so is storage review. Those articles have weight behind them.

I am a heavly multitasker. I have ten or more things going at once at times.

I also install a lot of software and I believe the faster tranfer rate would cut my install times in half.

Plus I am a backup nut so the RAID 0 risks won't affect me as much. At worse I would lose a weeks worth of data, but I can simply setup daily backup tasks to fix that.

Plus I think RAID 0 is cool and will give me bragging rights.

But buying a 2nd Raptor is a tough decision. I do a small amount or informal design, consulting, repair which I earmark for Computer upgrades so I have the money, but maybe I should save it for other futrure upgrades.

---
Don't get insulted when I distrust your or other peopls subjective experiences.

I am not even 100% sure I trust my subjective impression on the extent to which the Raptor makes my system feel more responsive. Maybe it only feels faster because I expect it to.

What I would love is if someone found a non-synthetic benchmarking suit that quantified what people think they feel when switching to a Raptor or a RAID 0 system.

Otherwise I will probably play it safe and wait until I can afford two more 400 GB RE drive and a hardware RAID 5 controller.

 

[zunaro]

After running multiple installations of WinXP (to include RAID 0, RAID1, and individual drives) on my 2x80gb WD HDDs. I prefer RAID 0. IMHO the performance is worth the risk, which is actually low since I tend to backup my data on another hard disk and CD/DVDs. And since I'm a gamer I don't have very much important data stored on my rig.

2GB DDR500 OCZ gold
A64 4000+
ASUS A8n SLI

 

[Whizzard9992]

Here's some more "Meat and bones."

http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q2/chipset-raid/index.x?pg=1

It's more server-oriented, and it gives some good info (like CPU usage with different chipsets, etc). Keep in mind that the new chipset, the i965, will use the ICH8 southbridge, which is 3 generations newer than the one reviewed. The chipset you use is VERY important. Also keep in mind that a lot of RAID users out there RAID on the NF4 chipset, which is a sub-par performer with regards to RAID.

For the most part, OfficeMark will likely provide the closest real-world idea of how RAID affects general IO, but it's still subjective. With the link I posted earler in the thread, there's more of a real-world performance gain going from one 10k to 2 10k drives than there is going from one 7200 to one 10k.

I multitask heavily. I use XDE, RSM, SQL, Oracle, Visual Studio, Office, etc quite a bit. I move files a lot and load a lot of stuff. I'll often be running OLAP queries, with a debugger running, and using CHM files (which are huge to load/parse). I'm a contractor so I work on a lot of different computers using different applications depending on where my contract is. I've always found computers with RAID to be much more responsive, but again, that's just an opinion.