Overclock.net banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey thanks for looking.

I currently have a Sata 5200 WD800 80gb. LOL
And as my secondary storage I have an IDE drive.

FAIL

F**k knows what I was thinking when I built my system and thought i could keep my old hard drive


SSD's are not an option but i would like to set up raid 0 as im sure my motherboard supports it


Please just recommend drives for raid 0

Thanks
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,034 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by liam.spelman View Post
it is seriously bottle necking my system though

Hard drives are the weakest link is all computers now a days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by liam.spelman View Post
it is seriously bottle necking my system though

um... in what situations is it bottlenecking your system? as far as i know, cpu do things in the ram and as long as you have a nice ram and its speed or size doesn't bottleneck it's fine... or do you mean it's just slow when you open files or during start up? anyways, i don't see how a normal 7200rpm hard drive won't do it if you're simply looking for "not bottlenecks", hard drives have minimium effects on performance in terms of processing time, state your needs plz...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
its slow boot slow transfer times.... when I open programs its dog slow... my friends laptop is faster than my sig rig to boot lol.
 

·
Goddess of Misfortune
Joined
·
3,246 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by liam.spelman View Post
Thanks would it be better to buy two 1tb f3's or 2 500gb f3's for raid 0?

Im interested in performance not storage
thanks
If you want performance, then you need a faster speed HDD. Velociraptors or similar would be the choice here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,137 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by liam.spelman View Post
Thanks would it be better to buy two 1tb f3's or 2 500gb f3's for raid 0?

Im interested in performance not storage
thanks
The 500GBs have 16MB cache but 1TBs have 32MB. (Both have seek time of 8.9ms average) So might as well got for 1TB I reckon .. But I agree with AuraNova, if SSD isn't your thing (yet) get some 10k RPM hdds
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,484 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by JCG View Post
The 500GBs have 16MB cache but 1TBs have 32MB. (Both have seek time of 8.9ms average) So might as well got for 1TB I reckon .. But I agree with AuraNova, if SSD isn't your thing (yet) get some 10k RPM hdds
Forget paying the premium on 10K drives. Not worth it. If you need performance, go with pair of 500GB drives in RAID-0 and short-stroke them to improve your access times to levels on-par with 10K-rpm drives.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,330 Posts
The 1TB drive is a better bet for you rather than the 500GB ones, as there isn't much difference in price but for any given short-stroked capacity the 1TB drive is much faster than the 500GB drive.

If you need 100GBs of space (say), that is 10% of a RAID0 of 2 500GB drives. But the same 100GB is just 5% of a RAID0 using 1TB drives.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top