I have a 120gb 7,200 rpm drive right now and was wanting to get some more speed from my HDD to make the system a little peppier. am looking to spend under 200, capacity isn't much of a concern so long as it is 100+ gigs. would i be better off buying a 10,000 rpm drive or buying another 7,200 for cheaper and just setting it up in RAID
10,000 rpm vs. RAID
- Thread starter DirtyD86
- Start date
Setting up two ide drives in RAID gives you a clone and some mirroring while simply adding a second drive would see the expected increase in drive space and potential backup as well as storage. The WD Raptors you've heard about come in two sizes only 74gb and 160gb and would see the 10,000rpm drive speed.
Besides a faster hard drve like a Raptor it often takes a few other things to boost a system's overall performance. With the 2gb of Kingston memory and a newer model DX10 compatible video card already seen you are left with going for a Raptor model.
Besides a faster hard drve like a Raptor it often takes a few other things to boost a system's overall performance. With the 2gb of Kingston memory and a newer model DX10 compatible video card already seen you are left with going for a Raptor model.
Bradan
New Member
raid 0 increases random read speed, no?
and adding a gig of memory is a better idea, and you could oc ur cpu.
That was drive space not drive speed. The system shown in the sig already has 2gb of memory installed. You won't see real gain adding another gig unless running larger apps like CAD, graphics desgin, or some other memory intensive software. Raptor drives offer 10,000rpm over the 7,200rpm typically seen on most ide and sata drives alike.
Bradan
New Member
RAID 0: striped set (minimum 2 disks) without parity. Provides improved performance and additional storage but no fault tolerance. Any disk failure destroys the array, which becomes more likely with more disks in the array. A single disk failure destroys the entire array because when data is written to a RAID 0 drive, the data is broken into fragments. The number of fragments is dictated by the number of disks in the drive. The fragments are written to their respective disks simultaneously on the same sector. This allows smaller sections of the entire chunk of data to be read off the drive in parallel, giving this type of arrangement huge bandwidth. When one sector on one of the disks fails, however, the corresponding sector on every other disk is rendered useless because part of the data is now corrupted. RAID 0 does not implement error checking so any error is unrecoverable. More disks in the array means higher bandwidth, but greater risk of data loss.
and i could have sworn his sig said 1 gig before
and i could have sworn his sig said 1 gig before
tlarkin
VIP Member
RAID 0 only improves performance when dealing with large amounts of data. Otherwise, surfing the net is not faster, you do not get more frames per second, you do not get performance increases in applications - with perhaps the exception of load times, and you run a higher risk of drive failure. If one drive fails or becomes corrupted or has a file system issue your whole array fails, and thus all your data is gone.
RAID 1, is mirrored, which decreases performance because both drives have to be 'syncronized' and read and write data at the exact same times.
RAID arrays are not meant to improve gaming or even be a real end user technology. It is really more of a server side technology with some professional exceptions like video editing or digital audio recording, since those files get to be several to many gigabytes in size.
You are better off buying a single high performance drive like a Raptor than running a RAID array in your desktop. It will be more stable too.
RAID 1, is mirrored, which decreases performance because both drives have to be 'syncronized' and read and write data at the exact same times.
RAID arrays are not meant to improve gaming or even be a real end user technology. It is really more of a server side technology with some professional exceptions like video editing or digital audio recording, since those files get to be several to many gigabytes in size.
You are better off buying a single high performance drive like a Raptor than running a RAID array in your desktop. It will be more stable too.
Agreed! When considering the sata type of arrary that idea hit a brick wall for the vulnerabilities seen. I work with video often where capacity counts. But that is why the systems used here are mainly work horse not gaming machines.
One thing I didn't mention earlier for DirtyD86's information is that many have and are looking at Raptor drives for their gaming builds. Those are more apt to benefit from the sata 3.0 over any 7,200rpm models at this time. You'll note that Raptors are also ATA150 capable not ATA100/133 as seen with the average 7,200rpm ide or sata model. They do run higher pricewise as you can see from the models seen at http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...150014+50001306+1035907918&name=Serial+ATA150
One thing I didn't mention earlier for DirtyD86's information is that many have and are looking at Raptor drives for their gaming builds. Those are more apt to benefit from the sata 3.0 over any 7,200rpm models at this time. You'll note that Raptors are also ATA150 capable not ATA100/133 as seen with the average 7,200rpm ide or sata model. They do run higher pricewise as you can see from the models seen at http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...150014+50001306+1035907918&name=Serial+ATA150