Best bang for my buck raid setup

[newtekie1]

You couldn't be more wrong.

 

[extrasalty]

Your data will come back in your face and be smeared all over you. Bye bye pretty files.

I couldn't have had more poetic answer.
People shouldn't forget that any kind of error may throw the RAID array out. Not just rotational drive crash. The second danger is to drop a hard drive while rebuilding the array- then you will understand the need of RAID6 and the importance of regular backup.

 

[newtekie1]

I couldn't have had more poetic answer.
People shouldn't forget that any kind of error may throw the RAID array out. Not just rotational drive crash. The second danger is to drop a hard drive while rebuilding the array- then you will understand the need of RAID6 and the importance of regular backup.

Most decent RAID controllers will handle multiple drive drops out, as long as the drive hasn't actually failed.

A RAID6 is nice because it can handle two drive failures and still have a usable array. RAID5 obviously only allows one drive failure. However, if another drive drops out, but doesn't fail, most RAID controllers will simply make the array not accessable until the drive comes back.

A home user will rarely have even a single drive fail, forget multiple drives. So a RAID5 setup is more than enough. Now in a mission critical setup, with 10+ drives, RAID6 is definitely a must, but not really in the home enviornment.

I would never put any critical data on a RAID0 array, even as a home user.

As for me, my RAID5 array is entirely backed up to a RAID0 array of the same size in a completely different machine twice a day. RAID1/5/6/Whatever is not a replacement for backing up.

 

[twicksisted]

I couldn't have had more poetic answer.
People shouldn't forget that any kind of error may throw the RAID array out. Not just rotational drive crash. The second danger is to drop a hard drive while rebuilding the array- then you will understand the need of RAID6 and the importance of regular backup.

yeah for a work machine or something that is used for storing important information then by all means security and stability is key.... but on a rig used for gaming, benchmarks and overclocking its not important really... who cares if it dies and you have to re-install windows.. most enthuisiasts reinstall windows a couple of times a year just to keep it from getting bogged full of crap and to squeeze a few more points or fps out of benches and games

most of the people on the forums are running overclocked benchmark rigs... and judging by the amount of "my pc isnt working anymore" posts, those arent exactely stable most of the time and these are the people who want the extra speed that Raid 0 gives... granted its not everyone, but neither is LN2 and 5ghz cpu clocks.

Raid 0 gives you speed... yes... stability... no of course not, but for me thats not the point

 

[DRDNA]

I have been running Raid 0 for at least 8 years now and some of the arrays are up to 4 disk array..I have been overclocking very heavy on all the builds I have never ever lost an array! I am talking BSOD city due to overclocks ...crashes galore..... man I remember my run with an FX57/raptor IDE raid 0/DFI mobo/Some crazy DDR1/X850XT PE/Vapochill LS...everything was overclocked ...pushed it daily for that possible new higher overclock on whatever I could clock and I saw more BSOD's and bios screens than anything and I never ever even once lost an array...Now I am just saying this to all but if I was to build for some one I would recommend redundancy as everyone else did.

 

[Deleted member 3]

I have been running Raid 0 for at least 8 years now and some of the arrays are up to 4 disk array..I have been overclocking very heavy on all the builds I have never ever lost an array! I am talking BSOD city due to overclocks ...crashes galore..... man I remember my run with an FX57/raptor IDE raid 0/DFI mobo/Some crazy DDR1/X850XT PE/Vapochill LS...everything was overclocked ...pushed it daily for that possible new higher overclock on whatever I could clock and I saw more BSOD's and bios screens than anything and I never ever even once lost an array...Now I am just saying this to all but if I was to build for some one I would recommend redundancy as everyone else did.

Yes, Steve Irwin spoke just like you. Anally raping crocodiles for over 8 years and not getting killed. Unfortunately this wasn't any guarantee that he would survive encounters with wild animals until his 100th birthday.

Being lucky is just that, lucky.

 

[niko084]

I would recommend redundancy as everyone else did.

I think that about sums it up.

 

[extrasalty]

Yes, Steve Irwin spoke just like you. Anally raping crocodiles for over 8 years and not getting killed. Unfortunately this wasn't any guarantee that he would survive encounters with wild animals until his 100th birthday.

Being lucky is just that, lucky.

 

[niko084]

Well here is my fresh Win7 Pro x64 install on my ICH9R WD Black 640gb drives in a 128k stripe.

Slow one is at stock 2.83, ram at 667 and speedstep enabled.
Fast one is at 3.4, ram at 800, and speedstep disabled.

I'm sure it could be tweaked out quite a bit more, but it's pretty snappy.

 

[newtekie1]

Well here is my fresh Win7 Pro x64 install on my ICH9R WD Black 640gb drives in a 128k stripe.

Slow one is at stock 2.83, ram at 667 and speedstep enabled.
Fast one is at 3.4, ram at 800, and speedstep disabled.

I'm sure it could be tweaked out quite a bit more, but it's pretty snappy.

It is seeing posts like this that make me have no regrets for getting the 5900RPM drives. Two of them in RAID0 outperforming two WD Blacks in RAID0 makes me happy...

 

[niko084]

It is seeing posts like this that make me have no regrets for getting the 5900RPM drives. Two of them in RAID0 outperforming two WD Blacks in RAID0 makes me happy...

No tweaks and I'm running 128 stripe.

I am yet to play with it too much, I have seen 2 500gb blacks put down a average of a little over 200MB/s according to HDTune.

Give me a few hours yet here to clean some stuff up and get all my crap re-installed.
Should also note these are the main system drives, which throws stuff off something fierce as well.

 

[newtekie1]

No tweaks and I'm running 128 stripe.

I am yet to play with it too much, I have seen 2 500gb blacks put down a average of a little over 200MB/s according to HDTune.

Give me a few hours yet here to clean some stuff up and get all my crap re-installed.
Should also note these are the main system drives, which throws stuff off something fierce as well.

No tweaks here either, not sure on stripe size though. I need to reformat that machine actually and put Win7 on it. They aren't system drives though.

 

[niko084]

No tweaks here either, not sure on stripe size though. I need to reformat that machine actually and put Win7 on it. They aren't system drives though.

Ya the non system drive makes a huge difference, especially on access time reporting.
Those are really fast for 5900s.

From pretty much everything I have seen too, Nvidia Raid benches better than Intel raid but Intel raid performs better when actually put to use.

Hard drives, raid, measuring performance... It's all..

Depending on the test block size I use I can get numbers all the way down to 2mb/s.