RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"?

SimmZ · 10-10-2007, 03:14 PM

I'm just wondering if a RAID-0 setup based on 2x SATAII 320 GB HDD (7200 RPM, 16 Mb cache) will give a real performance gain? I mean... what it the performance gain I can expect between a RAID-0 setup and a single SATAII HDD (assume it's the same HDD)?

I'm thinking a RAID-0 setup is a "must have" on any computer for performance gain, but some workmates are thinking it doesn't do that much gain...

**k0NG0** · 10-10-2007, 03:22 PM

If you ask me it's just twice the risk of losing data. I believe there are actual advantages in terms of speed, but I'm personally not convinced it outweighs the risks.

*SRTDodge05* · 10-10-2007, 04:01 PM

I ran raid-0 for little over a year on a few machines and i didnt have any problems with it. With raid theres a higher failure raid with either the drives or controller.

SimmZ · 10-15-2007, 04:36 PM

So... The performance gain is not enough important to compensate the higher risk of failure?

and just for fun... what about the RAID-5? Is the performance gain worth the money?

Thanks!!

XJ. · 10-15-2007, 09:28 PM

Think again, unless you're ADHD, a few extra seconds saved on game load times don't really mean anything. With Raid-5 you'll get even less of a performance boost an now you need to buy at least one more drive. You do get better reliability though.

SimmZ · 10-16-2007, 11:40 AM

OK. So... using a single SATA2 drive is the best way for a middle-range gaming computer?

XJ. · 10-16-2007, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SimmZ

OK. So... using a single SATA2 drive is the best way for a middle-range gaming computer?

Basically, yes. Raid-0 mostly gives a fast windows startup time and bragging rights, but generally isn't worth the extra cost and possible problems for desktop systems. For gaming, you are generally better off spend any extra money on more memory or a faster vid card.

SpeedDMN · 10-16-2007, 12:53 PM

I don't know.. It depends largely on the rest of your specs. For the Sempron you have listed I would say probably not worth it. If your other stuff is real fast (CPU, memory, etc) then it may be worth it. I agree with Kongo that it is a poor storage solution. I have RAID0 for a boot volume but keep all my important data on separate storage drives.

10-10-2007, 03:14 PM	#1
SimmZ Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Quebec (Canada) Posts: 55	RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"? I'm just wondering if a RAID-0 setup based on 2x SATAII 320 GB HDD (7200 RPM, 16 Mb cache) will give a real performance gain? I mean... what it the performance gain I can expect between a RAID-0 setup and a single SATAII HDD (assume it's the same HDD)? I'm thinking a RAID-0 setup is a "must have" on any computer for performance gain, but some workmates are thinking it doesn't do that much gain... __________________ - Apple MacBook Pro 15.4", C2D @ 2.33 Ghz, 2 GB, 160 GB (running XP Pro) - AMD Sempron64 3100+, 1 GB, 160 GB (based on Asus Barebone PC) (running XP Pro)
(Offline)

10-10-2007, 03:22 PM	#2
k0NG0 Remembering TQ Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Sweden Posts: 13,623	Re: RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"? If you ask me it's just twice the risk of losing data. I believe there are actual advantages in terms of speed, but I'm personally not convinced it outweighs the risks. __________________ Use Firefox - "the one that blocks all the schmutz" Feeling multicore elation? Remember this correlation: Amdahl's Law.
(Offline)

10-10-2007, 04:01 PM	#3
SRTDodge05 Grab Life By The Balls Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Michigan Posts: 7,830	Re: RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"? I ran raid-0 for little over a year on a few machines and i didnt have any problems with it. With raid theres a higher failure raid with either the drives or controller.
(Offline)

10-15-2007, 04:36 PM	#4
SimmZ Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Quebec (Canada) Posts: 55	Re: RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"? So... The performance gain is not enough important to compensate the higher risk of failure? and just for fun... what about the RAID-5? Is the performance gain worth the money? Thanks!! __________________ - Apple MacBook Pro 15.4", C2D @ 2.33 Ghz, 2 GB, 160 GB (running XP Pro) - AMD Sempron64 3100+, 1 GB, 160 GB (based on Asus Barebone PC) (running XP Pro)
(Offline)

10-15-2007, 09:28 PM	#5
XJ. ... Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: NH, USA Posts: 6,064	Re: RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"? Think again, unless you're ADHD, a few extra seconds saved on game load times don't really mean anything. With Raid-5 you'll get even less of a performance boost an now you need to buy at least one more drive. You do get better reliability though.
(Offline)

10-16-2007, 11:40 AM	#6
SimmZ Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Quebec (Canada) Posts: 55	Re: RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"? OK. So... using a single SATA2 drive is the best way for a middle-range gaming computer? __________________ - Apple MacBook Pro 15.4", C2D @ 2.33 Ghz, 2 GB, 160 GB (running XP Pro) - AMD Sempron64 3100+, 1 GB, 160 GB (based on Asus Barebone PC) (running XP Pro)
(Offline)

10-16-2007, 12:53 PM	#8
SpeedDMN Silicon Avatar Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Hyde Park, NY Posts: 2,927	Re: RAID-0 on desktop computer? A "must have"? I don't know.. It depends largely on the rest of your specs. For the Sempron you have listed I would say probably not worth it. If your other stuff is real fast (CPU, memory, etc) then it may be worth it. I agree with Kongo that it is a poor storage solution. I have RAID0 for a boot volume but keep all my important data on separate storage drives. __________________
(Offline)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode