Quote:
- what is the upside/downside by using raid instead of plain s-ata?
-should I use raid 0 or raid 1? and why?
|
Raid 0 makes two drives appear as a single big drive, think of it like taking the actual platters from both drives and putting them together in a single device. This will allow you to use all the space on the drives, so 120GB x 2 = 240 GB, and in theory this should double your access speed so 7200 x 2 = 14000. In practice of course, it will be slower, but still impressive. The downside is that if one drive gets fried, you lose all your data.
Raid 1 causes the drives to mirror each other, so each drive has exactly the same data. This may still give you speed improvements because you have increased the bandwidth to your drives, but in most circumstances, not much speed improvement. Also since the drives have the same data 120GB x 2 = 120GB. The upside is that you have reliability, if one drive gets fried the other one has that data backed up.
Quote:
am I off track if I think it's possible to install OS on two raid-disks and encrease transfer-speed and general performance by "mirroring" the two disks?
if so...is it true that you (sort of) double performance regards to the disks Rpm's? (example: 1 disk at 10K rpm and 1 at 7200 rpm together in raid = 7200x2 ?
|
So yes, you can install the OS on drives and more or less double the effective RPM (but this would be RAID 0 (striping), not RAID 1 (mirroring)).
Quote:
|
my point is: will it encrease performance on PC (for gaming & internet) by using Raid?
|
If you're willing to take the risk of doubling your chances of data loss, then yes you will see some performance improvements.