Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › RAID 0 vs RAID 1?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RAID 0 vs RAID 1? - Page 2

post #11 of 22
it's all been said : ..for speed..3 disk raid 0
 
Thuban Powah!
(14 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5650 Asus P6X58D-E Sapphire HD 7950 G.Skill Trident-X 2600 CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
Samsung 840 pro Bong cooler / RASA waterblock Rosewill Capstone Gold 750 None 
MouseMouse PadAudio
cheap! Newegg box panel ibeats with onboard. 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1075T w/2 cores locked @ 4.2+ M4a89GTD-Pro XFX Radeon HD 5870 8gb Samsung ddr3 1600 11-11-11-28@ 8-8-8-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
OCZ Agility2 40gb WD Blue 500GB Lite-On RASA waterblock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows & Linux Samsung 1080p 2 ms Dell Thermaltake TR2-800 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master Elite 330 (was) cheap 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Thuban Powah!
(14 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5650 Asus P6X58D-E Sapphire HD 7950 G.Skill Trident-X 2600 CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingPowerCase
Samsung 840 pro Bong cooler / RASA waterblock Rosewill Capstone Gold 750 None 
MouseMouse PadAudio
cheap! Newegg box panel ibeats with onboard. 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1075T w/2 cores locked @ 4.2+ M4a89GTD-Pro XFX Radeon HD 5870 8gb Samsung ddr3 1600 11-11-11-28@ 8-8-8-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
OCZ Agility2 40gb WD Blue 500GB Lite-On RASA waterblock 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows & Linux Samsung 1080p 2 ms Dell Thermaltake TR2-800 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master Elite 330 (was) cheap 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 22
Thread Starter 
I know there is not a parity drive in RAID 0, and there is a mirror in RAID 1, but does that make the RAID 0 more likely to fail than just if i used one hard drive?
That Box...
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 555 BE OC'd to 3.9 Ghz MSI 785GT-E63 AMD Radeon 6850 8GB Kingston DDR2 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate Western Digital Black Edition Western Digital Samsung CD/DVD Burner  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate (64 Bit)  HP 20" HD monitor Razer Lycosa Power OCZ 600w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
APEX Vortex 3620 Razer Naga Blue Mouse Pad Razer Megadolon 
Other
Pinnacle Capture Card 
  hide details  
Reply
That Box...
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 555 BE OC'd to 3.9 Ghz MSI 785GT-E63 AMD Radeon 6850 8GB Kingston DDR2 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate Western Digital Black Edition Western Digital Samsung CD/DVD Burner  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate (64 Bit)  HP 20" HD monitor Razer Lycosa Power OCZ 600w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
APEX Vortex 3620 Razer Naga Blue Mouse Pad Razer Megadolon 
Other
Pinnacle Capture Card 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 22
RAID 1 is more for redundancy.
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazykid122 View Post
I know there is not a parity drive in RAID 0, and there is a mirror in RAID 1, but does that make the RAID 0 more likely to fail than just if i used one hard drive?
In RAID0 if either of your drives fail you lose all data on the array. As all drives have a risk of failure, you are essentially doubling this risk by using two drives as a function of having half of your data on each drive.
Waiting on X399
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II B57 @ X4 3.9 Gigabyte 790FXTA-UD5 Sapphire Radeon 290 8 GB G.Skill 2133 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
250 GB 840 EVO Noctua NH-D14 Windows 10 Logitech K350 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic x750 Corsair 600T Logitech G100s Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Plantronics Gamecom 788 
  hide details  
Reply
Waiting on X399
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II B57 @ X4 3.9 Gigabyte 790FXTA-UD5 Sapphire Radeon 290 8 GB G.Skill 2133 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
250 GB 840 EVO Noctua NH-D14 Windows 10 Logitech K350 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic x750 Corsair 600T Logitech G100s Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Plantronics Gamecom 788 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmuckley View Post
it's all been said : ..for speed..3 disk raid 0
Actually four shortstroked is better. But you need a dedicated RAID controller like a Perc i5/i6. There's a thread on here where a guy shortstroked four Samsung F1's, I believe, and was getting some crazy awesome throughput. Like 400MB/s average. With Bursts in the 3k range IIRC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazykid122 View Post
I know there is not a parity drive in RAID 0, and there is a mirror in RAID 1, but does that make the RAID 0 more likely to fail than just if i used one hard drive?
Technically yes. Reason is, the information is split between however many drives you have in your array. The more drives, the higher potential for failure. So this would make RAID 1+0 a safer alternative as it can tolerate multiple drive losses as long as it's not all the mirror drives, however, it is more costly since you need at least 4 drives.

RAID 5 is also gaining in popularity since it can also tolerate a drive loss, and it only requires 3 drives.
Black Box
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-Vpro Evga 780 Classified Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
A-Data 128GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Pioneer BDR-207DBK Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 pro 64 Hannspree 25" 1080p LCD 2ms Razer Lycosa PC Power & Cooling 760w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 550D MX 518 Allsop Creative XFi Xtreme music 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Box
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-Vpro Evga 780 Classified Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
A-Data 128GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Pioneer BDR-207DBK Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 pro 64 Hannspree 25" 1080p LCD 2ms Razer Lycosa PC Power & Cooling 760w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 550D MX 518 Allsop Creative XFi Xtreme music 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackOmega View Post
Actually four shortstroked is better. But you need a dedicated RAID controller like a Perc i5/i6. There's a thread on here where a guy shortstroked four Samsung F1's, I believe, and was getting some crazy awesome throughput. Like 400MB/s average. With Bursts in the 3k range IIRC.


Technically yes. Reason is, the information is split between however many drives you have in your array. The more drives, the higher potential for failure. So this would make RAID 1+0 a safer alternative as it can tolerate multiple drive losses as long as it's not all the mirror drives, however, it is more costly since you need at least 4 drives.

RAID 5 is also gaining in popularity since it can also tolerate a drive loss, and it only requires 3 drives.
Yeah, makes sense. im a gamer, so i want maps etc. to load faster, along with in general faster reads/writes. i also edit videos and listen to alot of music and watch alot of movies and shows. so i want alot of space, thats fast, and reliable. im still reading up on all the raids and getting a better understanding, what would be the best for what i want to do?
That Box...
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 555 BE OC'd to 3.9 Ghz MSI 785GT-E63 AMD Radeon 6850 8GB Kingston DDR2 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate Western Digital Black Edition Western Digital Samsung CD/DVD Burner  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate (64 Bit)  HP 20" HD monitor Razer Lycosa Power OCZ 600w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
APEX Vortex 3620 Razer Naga Blue Mouse Pad Razer Megadolon 
Other
Pinnacle Capture Card 
  hide details  
Reply
That Box...
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 555 BE OC'd to 3.9 Ghz MSI 785GT-E63 AMD Radeon 6850 8GB Kingston DDR2 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate Western Digital Black Edition Western Digital Samsung CD/DVD Burner  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate (64 Bit)  HP 20" HD monitor Razer Lycosa Power OCZ 600w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
APEX Vortex 3620 Razer Naga Blue Mouse Pad Razer Megadolon 
Other
Pinnacle Capture Card 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazykid122 View Post
Yeah, makes sense. im a gamer, so i want maps etc. to load faster, along with in general faster reads/writes. i also edit videos and listen to alot of music and watch alot of movies and shows. so i want alot of space, thats fast, and reliable. im still reading up on all the raids and getting a better understanding, what would be the best for what i want to do?
Well that depends. Could you tolerate losing everything you have stored on your computer? If so, then RAID 0, and you get the full space of both drives. This offers the fastest overall performance. But obviously tolerates no drive failures.

If it's imperative not to lose your info, then possibly RAID 1. However, you lose half your space since the drives are technically duplicates of each other. Best fault tolerance.

Then there's RAID 1+0 (10), which stripes and mirrors which offers the best overall performance and fault tolerance. However, there's a minimum of four drives in this array. This array can tolerate multiple drive failures.

RAID 5 is also decent as you only need 3 drives, however, regardless of how many drives you have in this array, it can only tolerate 1 drive failure.

So really, it's up to you to decide what's best for your needs.

FWIW, I've been running RAID 0 arrays for a few years now without any issues. But I also bought enterprise class (server) HDD's for this exact purpose since their rate of failure is very low.
Black Box
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-Vpro Evga 780 Classified Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
A-Data 128GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Pioneer BDR-207DBK Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 pro 64 Hannspree 25" 1080p LCD 2ms Razer Lycosa PC Power & Cooling 760w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 550D MX 518 Allsop Creative XFi Xtreme music 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Box
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-Vpro Evga 780 Classified Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
A-Data 128GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Pioneer BDR-207DBK Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 pro 64 Hannspree 25" 1080p LCD 2ms Razer Lycosa PC Power & Cooling 760w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 550D MX 518 Allsop Creative XFi Xtreme music 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackOmega View Post
Well that depends. Could you tolerate losing everything you have stored on your computer? If so, then RAID 0, and you get the full space of both drives. This offers the fastest overall performance. But obviously tolerates no drive failures.

If it's imperative not to lose your info, then possibly RAID 1. However, you lose half your space since the drives are technically duplicates of each other. Best fault tolerance.

Then there's RAID 1+0 (10), which stripes and mirrors which offers the best overall performance and fault tolerance. However, there's a minimum of four drives in this array. This array can tolerate multiple drive failures.

RAID 5 is also decent as you only need 3 drives, however, regardless of how many drives you have in this array, it can only tolerate 1 drive failure.

So really, it's up to you to decide what's best for your needs.

FWIW, I've been running RAID 0 arrays for a few years now without any issues. But I also bought enterprise class (server) HDD's for this exact purpose since their rate of failure is very low.
Raid 10 sounds the best, but aren't decent raid cards like $200+
That Box...
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 555 BE OC'd to 3.9 Ghz MSI 785GT-E63 AMD Radeon 6850 8GB Kingston DDR2 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate Western Digital Black Edition Western Digital Samsung CD/DVD Burner  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate (64 Bit)  HP 20" HD monitor Razer Lycosa Power OCZ 600w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
APEX Vortex 3620 Razer Naga Blue Mouse Pad Razer Megadolon 
Other
Pinnacle Capture Card 
  hide details  
Reply
That Box...
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X2 555 BE OC'd to 3.9 Ghz MSI 785GT-E63 AMD Radeon 6850 8GB Kingston DDR2 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Seagate Western Digital Black Edition Western Digital Samsung CD/DVD Burner  
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate (64 Bit)  HP 20" HD monitor Razer Lycosa Power OCZ 600w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
APEX Vortex 3620 Razer Naga Blue Mouse Pad Razer Megadolon 
Other
Pinnacle Capture Card 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazykid122 View Post
Raid 10 sounds the best, but aren't decent raid cards like $200+
Perc I5's can be had for as little as $100. In order to get the best performance, you really need one.
Black Box
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-Vpro Evga 780 Classified Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
A-Data 128GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Pioneer BDR-207DBK Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 pro 64 Hannspree 25" 1080p LCD 2ms Razer Lycosa PC Power & Cooling 760w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 550D MX 518 Allsop Creative XFi Xtreme music 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Box
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k Asus P8Z77-Vpro Evga 780 Classified Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
A-Data 128GB SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Pioneer BDR-207DBK Corsair H80 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 pro 64 Hannspree 25" 1080p LCD 2ms Razer Lycosa PC Power & Cooling 760w 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair 550D MX 518 Allsop Creative XFi Xtreme music 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 22
If you're concerned about drive failure, then back up to an external hard drive. RAID isn't for protecting against failure so much as allowing servers to continue running when faced with failure. It's not as good a system as just using an external hard drive for backups.

If you're trying to speed up your system, raid also isn't the answer. You won't notice any "speedup" from higher sequential speeds, which is what raid gives you. The only purpose to raid (when it comes to speed) is to speed up the transfer time of large (we're talking gigabytes) files.

So:

-are you going to be transferring large files frequently and need increased speed?
-do you need your computer to be running 24/7 and never turn off for backups?

If the former is true, consider raid 0 or raid 10. If the latter is true, consider raid 1 or raid 10.

If neither is true, you probably won't see any benefit from raid and might want to consider a solid state drive instead of that second drive.
Peaches
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 Foxconn Blood Rage Sapphire Radeon HD4890 OCZ Gold 6 GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
64GB C300 boot, 1TB storage (2 WD Caviar Blues ... Samsung Blu-Ray reader Prolimatech Megahalems Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer 1920x1200 Filco Majestouch Cherry MX Blues Corsair 850HX Corsair Obsidian 800D 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer DeathAdder Black PureTrak Talent ASUS Xonar Essence ST --> Sennheiser HD600 
  hide details  
Reply
Peaches
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 Foxconn Blood Rage Sapphire Radeon HD4890 OCZ Gold 6 GB DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
64GB C300 boot, 1TB storage (2 WD Caviar Blues ... Samsung Blu-Ray reader Prolimatech Megahalems Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer 1920x1200 Filco Majestouch Cherry MX Blues Corsair 850HX Corsair Obsidian 800D 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer DeathAdder Black PureTrak Talent ASUS Xonar Essence ST --> Sennheiser HD600 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hard Drives & Storage
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › RAID 0 vs RAID 1?