Question about raid and ide performance on p4p800e dlx.

  • Thread starter Thread starter DC
  • Start date Start date
D

DC

My system is

p4p800e dlx w/2.4 533 p4
1 gig ram in dual channel
prim master 80gig wd (os and program files)
prim slave pioneer a05
sec master pioneer a09
sec slave liteon 52x cdrw

2x maxtor 160gig hds on promise controller in ide mode (used as work
and storage drives for processing video)

Would I see much improvement in performance if I install the 2 maxtor
drives as raid0?

Thanks
Dc
 
I have 2 Maxtor SATA 160 GB drives configured as Raid0 and they benchmark at
Max. of 107.6 MB/s compared to my IDE Maxtor 60 GB 133 benchmark of 51.2
MB/s. The RaidO array is noticeably faster but you run the risk of drive
failure. I use the 60 GB as a backup drive. I am retired and try trial and
other software every day and when the system becomes unstable, I have to
reformat and reinstall all my software about every three months or so. It
used to take me two days but with the Raid setup I can do it in about four
hours. I would not be without it. Hope this helps.
 
I should have mentioned that if you do create a Raid0 array you will loose
all your date on those two disk. So be sure to back the data up before you
create the Raid0.
 
There are a lot of theories on whether raid0 is beneficial to audio/video
processing. In benchmarks it will show you great performance
enhancements. But in the real world It doesn't amount to very much imho.
I've tried both setups, raid and nonraid. At first you're so impressed with
the benchmarks of raid0 that you believe this is the best thing that
happened for a long time. Imho, in the world of IDE it's just a big hoax.
Especially, when you're running your OS and video on the same raid array.
IDE (still) lacks the command queing found in SCSI systems. Therefore,
it's great in synthetic benchmarks, but the reallife performance is much
less.
Add the risk of datacorruption and the benefits are down to nil.
(Maybe thats why they call it raid'0' LOL)
The only real benefit I could find is...windows boot up very fast.
Like I mentioned, I tested it and I'm running seperate(nonraid) drives now.
One drive with OS and programs etc., the other for audio/video.
Don't take my word for it, tho, try it youreself. Just run the same
audio/video
creation/conversion on both systems and make up your own mind.

Hans, do you really want us to believe that it takes 2 days to install
windows
on a non raid system and 'only' 4 hours on one with raid?
I can do it in about 5 minutes and raid has nothing to do with it. Ever
heard
of making images with ghost or driveimage? I think this will really make
your day.

Nickeldome
 
There are a lot of theories on whether raid0 is beneficial to audio/video
processing. In benchmarks it will show you great performance
enhancements. But in the real world It doesn't amount to very much imho.
I've tried both setups, raid and nonraid. At first you're so impressed with
the benchmarks of raid0 that you believe this is the best thing that
happened for a long time. Imho, in the world of IDE it's just a big hoax.
Especially, when you're running your OS and video on the same raid array.
IDE (still) lacks the command queing found in SCSI systems. Therefore,
it's great in synthetic benchmarks, but the reallife performance is much
less.
Add the risk of datacorruption and the benefits are down to nil.
(Maybe thats why they call it raid'0' LOL)
The only real benefit I could find is...windows boot up very fast.
Like I mentioned, I tested it and I'm running seperate(nonraid) drives now.
One drive with OS and programs etc., the other for audio/video.
Don't take my word for it, tho, try it youreself. Just run the same
audio/video
creation/conversion on both systems and make up your own mind.

Hans, do you really want us to believe that it takes 2 days to install
windows
on a non raid system and 'only' 4 hours on one with raid?
I can do it in about 5 minutes and raid has nothing to do with it. Ever
heard
of making images with ghost or driveimage? I think this will really make
your day.

Nickeldome
Click to expand...


Nickledome is 100% correct. Right on the money. Motherboard
manufacturers put RAID controllers on their boards because customers
what it. That's logical. The fact that so many customers want it is
what's illogical. There are definitely some users who should install
RAID 0. For that small minority, the proper way to do it is with a
dedicated PCI controller with its OWN onboard processor that doesn't
task the CPU with all its work -- for example, the 3Ware Escalade
series. For most of us, RAID 0 is unwise.

RAID 1 is an different matter, but that's a subject for another
thread.
Ron
 
Back
Top