RAID 0 Guide: Set-up, OS installation, and Optimization - Page 22

Mickatroid · 19th April 2012, 7:13 PM

A thread that will not rest in peace. It is great that it is still useful

datechnoman · 19th April 2012, 7:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickatroid

A thread that will not rest in peace. It is great that it is still useful

best guide i have ever read explaining RAID 0 setup. Simple but tells you everything you need to know. Great job Author!

KANNIS · 23rd June 2012, 7:29 PM

Guys does RAID 0 generally decrease the life of hard drives?

Hive · 23rd June 2012, 8:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KANNIS

Guys does RAID 0 generally decrease the life of hard drives?

No reason it would.

Mickatroid · 24th June 2012, 10:18 PM

All things being equal two drives in RAID 0 (for example) should last as long as the two drives would separately. I suppose that, depending on work load one drive might get to be spun down a lot of the time which it would not in RAID 0.

The thing you must not miss though is that if EITHER drive in RAID 0 fails for all practical purposes the entire contents of the array is lost.

Sektion8 · 14th February 2013, 9:08 PM

7+ years since the OP got an update. Is it still current?

I tried to get RAID 10/1+0/0+1 whatever one wishes to call it. I choked.

I had 8 WD Cav Black 1TB drives gathering dust, and picked-up a 2720SGL card cheap. Thought I'd use them all, cheap WIN. Best speeds, 4TB is PLENTY, and total cost is peanuts. I believe the theory is perfectly fine. RAID 10 scales.

I created the array in the Rocketraid BIOS. Windows never saw it properly. By memory, it only saw 2TB partition + 3TB unaccessble (in ANY way) or something messed-up like that. Copied stuff on there from an SSD. Speeds were <150MB/s. Eventually restarted the PC... Array was never seen again. That was 10+ months ago.

RAID and I SERIOUSLY do not get along.

Mickatroid · 15th February 2013, 7:56 PM

Check post 305 on the previous page and the discussion that follows.

In short, yes it is still good stuff. However, the number of people who want to boot of two or more raid 0 mechanical HDDs to increase their system speed (given the awesomeness of SSDs) is probably small these days

Edit: sorry to hear about your disaster.

ledhead900 · 19th April 2013, 12:36 PM

I think this site explains things a little better http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ARTS,1735.html

Gaming seems to run best at 128KB not sure if higher will do much better.
OS lower is better also 16/32 you will see bugger all small steps don't give much improvement such as 32/64 you won't notice it but the benchmarks will be slightly higher.

23rd June 2012, 7:29 PM	#318
KANNIS Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Sydney Posts: 8,033	Guys does RAID 0 generally decrease the life of hard drives? __________________ \|-O-\| (-O-) \|-O-\| "STAY IN ATTACK FORMATION" OCAU Fishing Club Member #1 Last edited by KANNIS; 23rd June 2012 at 7:31 PM.

14th February 2013, 9:08 PM	#321
Sektion8 Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: In 9,000 Metres Turn Left Posts: 101	7+ years since the OP got an update. Is it still current? I tried to get RAID 10/1+0/0+1 whatever one wishes to call it. I choked. I had 8 WD Cav Black 1TB drives gathering dust, and picked-up a 2720SGL card cheap. Thought I'd use them all, cheap WIN. Best speeds, 4TB is PLENTY, and total cost is peanuts. I believe the theory is perfectly fine. RAID 10 scales. I created the array in the Rocketraid BIOS. Windows never saw it properly. By memory, it only saw 2TB partition + 3TB unaccessble (in ANY way) or something messed-up like that. Copied stuff on there from an SSD. Speeds were <150MB/s. Eventually restarted the PC... Array was never seen again. That was 10+ months ago. RAID and I SERIOUSLY do not get along. __________________ MAIN: Intel i5 750 \| 2x 4GB Ripjaws DDR3-1333 \| Gigabyte P55-UD3R \| Highpoint RocketRaid 2720SGL \| RAID 10: 8x 1TB WD Cav Black \| 60GB OCZ Vert2 \| HD 4650 1GB \| 2x 22" LCD \| Win7 Pro 64Bit LAPTOP: Dell XPS M1210 \| Intel Core2 Duo 7200 \| 2x 2GB DDR2-800 \| 640GB WD Cav Blue \| 256MB GeForce Go7400 \| Win7 Pro 64Bit HTPC (Forever In Progress): Intel i3 530 @4Ghz \| 2x 2GB Team-Elite DDR3-1333 \| Gigabyte H55-USB3 \| 4x 2TB F4 Samsung \| Compro E900F \| 100" Sony PJ \| Win7 Pro 64Bit Last edited by Sektion8; 14th February 2013 at 9:17 PM.

19th April 2012, 7:13 PM	#316
Mickatroid Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Canberra Posts: 882	A thread that will not rest in peace. It is great that it is still useful

24th June 2012, 10:18 PM	#320
Mickatroid Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Canberra Posts: 882	All things being equal two drives in RAID 0 (for example) should last as long as the two drives would separately. I suppose that, depending on work load one drive might get to be spun down a lot of the time which it would not in RAID 0. The thing you must not miss though is that if EITHER drive in RAID 0 fails for all practical purposes the entire contents of the array is lost.

15th February 2013, 7:56 PM	#322
Mickatroid Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Canberra Posts: 882	Check post 305 on the previous page and the discussion that follows. In short, yes it is still good stuff. However, the number of people who want to boot of two or more raid 0 mechanical HDDs to increase their system speed (given the awesomeness of SSDs) is probably small these days Edit: sorry to hear about your disaster.

19th April 2013, 12:36 PM	#323
ledhead900 Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: TAS,Burnie Posts: 526	I think this site explains things a little better http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ARTS,1735.html Gaming seems to run best at 128KB not sure if higher will do much better. OS lower is better also 16/32 you will see bugger all small steps don't give much improvement such as 32/64 you won't notice it but the benchmarks will be slightly higher.