• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

RAID 5 for games?

Mindweaver

Moderato®™
Staff member
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Messages
8,194 (1.49/day)
Location
Charleston, SC
System Name Tower of Power / Sechs
Processor i7 14700K / i7 5820k @ 4.5ghz
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 / X99S GAMING 7
Cooling CM MasterLiquid ML360 Mirror ARGB Close-Loop AIO / CORSAIR Hydro Series H100i Extreme
Memory CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3600 / G.Skill DDR4 2800 16GB 4x4GB
Video Card(s) ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti / ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3070 V2 OC Edition
Storage 4x Samsung 980 Pro 1TB M.2, 2x Crucial 1TB SSD / Samsung 870 PRO 500GB M.2
Display(s) Samsung 32" Odyssy G5 Gaming 144hz 1440p, ViewSonic 32" 72hz 1440p / 2x ViewSonic 32" 72hz 1440p
Case Phantek "400A" / Phanteks “Enthoo Pro series”
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC4080 / Azalia Realtek ALC1150
Power Supply Corsair RM Series RM750 / Corsair CXM CX600M
Mouse Glorious Gaming Model D Wireless / Razer DeathAdder Chroma
Keyboard Glorious GMMK with box-white switches / Keychron K6 pro with blue swithes
VR HMD Quest 3 (128gb) + Rift S + HTC Vive + DK1
Software Windows 11 Pro x64 / Windows 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores Yes
RAID10 is wasteful only having 50% of the drive total capacity available. RAID5 is n-1 capacity. If we were talking 3 drive RAID5 versus 2 drive RAID0, the read performance would be about the same but write performance of RAID5 is much worse.

Basic overview of common levels: https://www.datarecovery.net/articles/raid-level-comparison.aspx

I would never recommend RAID0 with more than two drives. The risk of data loss keeps going up and up.


Here's my 11 year old RAID5:
View attachment 101594
Heh, I thought it felt painfully slow. Well, there's the proof. It needs upgrading but, meh, drives are still good. :roll:
Yea, I never said RAID10 would be cheap. :toast: Also, I had to retire my personal RAID 0 game drive array over the same thing.. It worked but was showing it's age.. lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: hat
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
7,412 (3.02/day)
Location
Poland
System Name Purple rain
Processor 10.5 thousand 4.2G 1.1v
Motherboard Zee 490 Aorus Elite
Cooling Noctua D15S
Memory 16GB 4133 CL16-16-16-31 Viper Steel
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio
Storage SU900 128,8200Pro 1TB,850 Pro 512+256+256,860 Evo 500,XPG950 480, Skyhawk 2TB
Display(s) Acer XB241YU+Dell S2716DG
Case P600S Silent w. Alpenfohn wing boost 3 ARGBT+ fans
Audio Device(s) K612 Pro w. FiiO E10k DAC,W830BT wireless
Power Supply Superflower Leadex Gold 850W
Mouse G903 lightspeed+powerplay,G403 wireless + Steelseries DeX + Roccat rest
Keyboard HyperX Alloy SilverSpeed (w.HyperX wrist rest),Razer Deathstalker
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores A LOT
I still don't understand why people wanna cache HDDs. I wanna have control over what is on the ssd and what isn't. I don't want the system to manage it, eventually it'll waste space on what I don't want on the ssd and the stuff I do want there will get pushed out.
People worry about GB/$ too much. If I had to choose either a 500GB ssd or 5TB hdd for games, I'd take the ssd all day. It's not just the speed and quietness, it's also this

In terms of endurance, TechReport reveals that that the majority of consumer quality SSDs tends to be able to endure more than 700TB of reading & writing, with a few others surviving up to an exceptional 2.5 pentabytes. They also found that TLC type SSDs had generally less endurance than their MLC counterparts.



Compare that to Backblaze’s tests with their HDDs. Backblaze has kept up to 25,000 hard drives constantly online for the last four years. Every time a drive of theirs failed, they noted it down, and then slotted in a replacement. After four years, Backblaze has collected detailed data of the failure rates of Hard Disk Drives over the first four years of their life.


It seems that hard drives have three distinct failure “phases.” In the first phase, which lasts 1.5 years, hard drives have an annual failure rate of 5.1%. For the next 1.5 years, the annual failure rate drops to 1.4%. After three years, the failure rate explodes to 11.8% per year. In short, this means that around 92% of drives survive the first 18 months, and almost all of those (90%) then go on to reach three years.


Extrapolating from these figures, just under 80% of all hard drives will survive to their fourth anniversary. Backblaze doesn’t have figures beyond that, but its distinguished engineer, Brian Beach, speculates that the failure rate will probably stick to around 12% per year.

And you wanna tell me you're thinking about having three of those ?

I have 3TB+1TB HDDs myself, but they mostly just serve for data I write then delete or upload, and they're so cheap per GB that I don't care if they die in the middle of this sentence.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2016
Messages
1,042 (0.36/day)
Location
Pristina
System Name My PC
Processor 4670K@4.4GHz
Motherboard Gryphon Z87
Cooling CM 212
Memory 2x8GB+2x4GB @2400GHz
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX 580 GTS Black Edition 1425MHz OC+, 8GB
Storage Intel 530 SSD 480GB + Intel 510 SSD 120GB + 2x500GB hdd raid 1
Display(s) HP envy 32 1440p
Case CM Mastercase 5
Audio Device(s) Sbz ZXR
Power Supply Antec 620W
Mouse G502
Keyboard G910
Software Win 10 pro
Raid 5 is outdated but 6 is what you need no speed degradation but higher costs, but i would use raid 10 for that more capacity, speed and redundancy.
 
Top