Raptor jumper settings for RAID 0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael S.
  • Start date Start date
M

Michael S.

Although this might be slightly OT for this group, I am in the process of
creating a new build based upon a P4C800-E mobo with RAID 0 Raptors running
off of the Intel controller. I have read that it does not matter how the
Raptors are jumpered and also read that a person should just leave the
jumpers alone. Much appreciation to those of you with RAID 0 Raptors if you
would share with me what their jumper settings should be. As soon as my
video card arrives (if ever), I will be ready for the installation of the
Raptors.

MikeSp
 
Michael S. said:
Although this might be slightly OT for this group, I am in the process of
creating a new build based upon a P4C800-E mobo with RAID 0 Raptors running
off of the Intel controller.
Click to expand...

You do know that RAID 0 performance gains are minimal for most
applications?
I have read that it does not matter how the
Raptors are jumpered and also read that a person should just leave the
jumpers alone.
Click to expand...

Indeed, there's no need to jumper anything, since SATA does not know
"Master" or "Slave" drives, but is purely point-to-point. The rest (like
setting up an array and all) is software level.

Stephan
 
I have to disagree with the view that RAID 0 performace gains are minimal. I
have just set up a RAID 0 on the intel chip as I work with large collections
of files. I have found that moving files or anything that needs to access
data off the hard drive is faster. Where do you get your info from? Did you
read it or is it just you personal view?

Enigma
 
Enigma said:
I have to disagree with the view that RAID 0 performace gains are minimal. I
have just set up a RAID 0 on the intel chip as I work with large collections
of files. I have found that moving files or anything that needs to access
data off the hard drive is faster.
Click to expand...

This sounds like the access pattern were largely sequential. This is
indeed an area where RAID 0 shows some benefits. (Another would be
server use when accesses are <= stripe size.) In all-day life desktop
applications, however, gains are rather small. RAID 0 won't do anything
in terms of felt "snappiness" (that's where lower physical access times
rule), plus the chance of total data loss is approximately doubled over
a single drive. (And what percentage of self-proclaimed "power users"
makes regular backups?) Also, two drives are always going to be more
noisy than just one, and two drives of the same type or at least
rotational speed can also cause some annoying beat tones. (Which I
promptly did not remember when purchasing a second Cheetah 36ES, which
then had to go into another computer.)
Where do you get your info from?
Click to expand...

http://faq.storagereview.com/tiki-index.php?page=SingleDriveVsRaid0

Stephan
 
I decided to go with raid simply because I move large files around a lot and
even with the fast hard drives that I had (ultra 160 scsi, 7200rpm 8mb cache
ide) the hard drives were a definate bottleneck in an otherwise fast system,
P4 2GHz, Asus P4T-E mobo, 512 MB RDRAM. I realise there is an increased risk
of data loss with raid and while I can't speak for any one else I consider
myself to be a power user but I do backup regularly. I think anyone whose
been computing for a while will have lost some data so they know the
importance of regular backups. Another advantage with raid is the size of
partitions. I just bought 2x250 GB Maxtor Maxline 2 hard drives and created
5 partitions with the storage partition being 390 GB. So where I had to
spread my stored files over multiple partitions I can now keep them
altogether. In an ideal world I would purchase another 2 Maxtor hard drives
and create a RAID 0 +1 which would almost eliminate any data loss. The
probability of two hard drives failing at the same time is almost nill.

I wrote the above then read the article from the web site you suggested.
They seem to state the obvious in that application wont run faster. You
would have to have a very limited understanding of computers to think that
apps will run faster from a raid system. Getting data (applications) into
ram will most times be faster with raid but running them is the processors
job. I know this is simplifying matters but it will suffice for this email.
As I said I went for raid as I move large files around and my system is
faster because of it. It is obviously up to the individual to run their
computer in a way that suits their need. As most of us are new to using raid
time will tell if the benefits outway the risks.

One last point, noise. I previously had an ultra 160 scsi as my boot drive
and after benchmarking it against a 7200rpm 8mb cache ide Maxtor I ended up
having the ide as the boot drive because I couldn't stand the noise from the
scsi drive anymore. As for the noise level from my maxtor maxline 2 drives
you can't hear them. They are very quite. My single ide maxtor is noisier
than the two in my raid.

Enigma
 
Back
Top