Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Thermal power
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Thermal power - Page 3

post #21 of 40
Thread Starter 
What I ment was, that when even a little chunk is read or written, it's done on two disks as it's two mirrors in a stripe, right? Or two stripes in a mirror .. either way two disks
The lifetime/stability prolonging should be a legit enough claim I'd say, but yes; it's more heat to disperse.
And since there's no certainty as such about where on which disk(s) there is being written to, the four disks will as average be more often active than if only one OS-disk and e.g. three for storage. But it's assumption .. no real exp. with RAID.
post #22 of 40
you have a separate RAID controller for that? Not many boards support RAID10... it's mostly RAID0+1 (10 = two mirrors that are striped, and 0+1 = two stripes that are mirrored)
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 40
Thread Starter 
Again a misinterpretation on my behalf I understood that 1+0 and 10 where just .. potatoe potartoe So yes, it's raid1+0, but the assumption concerning read/write still holds?
post #24 of 40
Yep, it does

I think that the two 'front' drives (the first striped array) will do more work than the two 'back' drivers (the second striped array). This is based on the fact that the second array is the mirror, which is generally only accessed for write events, and not really for read events. Thus, those two drives should remain relatively cool
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 40
Thread Starter 
Again I thought that the/one of the smart thing(s) were that both r/w events were (intelligently) spread on both disk for optimal performance on top of datasecurity.
I've read your opinion article on raids and 1+0 is my opinion
As long as were going OT, am I at least in the right understanding that four 250GB disks in 1+0 will give one 500GB drive, not two 250GB? Or am I just waving my ignorance once more?
post #26 of 40
It will appear as one 500GB drive indeed.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
post #27 of 40
Thread Starter 
wee, I scored a point But thanks for the info'n'all. rep for you
Guess the main thing left is to press the order button.
post #28 of 40
Thread Starter 
Oh ... just a quickie:
It's just about RAID0+1 vs RAID10.
Which is preferable, or is in the end the same result on speeds et.c. and that reason applies to the absence of RAID10 in your(Chozart) RAID-comparison sticky?
post #29 of 40
The reason for the lack of RAID10 is that not many onboard RAID controllers support it (haven't found any to be honest). Since my tests were all run on the onboard controller of the A8R32 MVP Deluxe motherboard, my choices were limited to the RAID arrays supported by this board (RAID0, 1, 5, 0+1, JBOD). I believe there should be little to no performance difference between 0+1 and 10, and 0+1 will serve you just fine.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E8400 @ 3.8 GHz DFI LANPARTY DK X38-T2R eVGA 8400GS 2GB Mushkin DDR2 800 (single stick) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB WD SATA None Windows XP Pro 32-bit HP Pavilion f1703 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
N/A Corsair HX520 Coolermaster Cavalier N/A 
Mouse Pad
N/A 
  hide details  
Reply
post #30 of 40
Thread Starter 
oh, but I found one The ASUS P5WDG2-WS series seems a good option to me. And they state that the board handles option for two RAID10, not 0+1, and the one ctlr. with JBOD and the other with RAID5 as the difference between the two. Didn't expect 0+1/10 to be any much different from eachother, but you never know
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Thermal power