RAID setups?? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : RAID setups??


RaiderRodney
06-09-2005, 11:13
Ok I am pretty much up to date on things...except for RAID configurations. I am thinking of upgrading and wanted to get some facts about RAID. Would someone care to tell me the different setups, pros, cons, etc. Anf in their opinion what setup would be best for me...which would primarily be gaming.

thanks a bunch :)

prism
06-09-2005, 14:08
a reference link

http://www.gtweb.net/RAID_desc.html

LittleLebowski
06-09-2005, 14:51
If you're using IDE, a switch to SATA would be better than RAID. Personally, if you're using a decent disk setup, I wouldn't worry about it. Worry more about your video card.

grantglock
06-09-2005, 14:52
Originally posted by LittleLebowski
If you're using IDE, a switch to SATA would be better than RAID. Personally, if you're using a decent disk setup, I wouldn't worry about it. Worry more about your video card.

SATA and RAID are two different things

RaiderRodney
06-09-2005, 15:03
Originally posted by LittleLebowski
If you're using IDE, a switch to SATA would be better than RAID. Personally, if you're using a decent disk setup, I wouldn't worry about it. Worry more about your video card.

Unfortunately I will be staying with my old HD's :( Doesn't like it will matter on RAID...the motherboard I am getting doesn't seem to support it that I can find anyway. It is the ASUS P5P800

pyblood
06-09-2005, 19:56
Not a lot of motherboard have IDE raid onboard, but you can purchase a PCI IDE RAID controller card and install it in your computer. Here is a card from High Point, but other companies like Promise and Adaptec make good cards as well

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16816115003

Washington,D.C.
06-09-2005, 20:06
Be careful which controller card you choose.The one above looks to be an ultra ATA 133 IDE controller card not an IDE RAID controller card.Make sure it is a RAID controller if that's what you want.

pyblood
06-09-2005, 20:56
Thanks for catching my error Washington,D.C. I have edited the post.

fastvfr
06-10-2005, 00:34
My P4C800-E Deluxe has RAID capability for both IDE and SATA.

I'm using two WD's right now as one disk in RAID 0.

I wonder why the P5P800 does not have that functionality?

Apparently this MOBO is a large step down from mine, with its 865 chipset and non-R Southbridge chip.

Personally, I'd pass.

If you will do much gaming, consider the AMD SKT 939 boards from Asus, such as the excellent NForce-chipped A8N-SLI and a 64-bit CPU. The 3500+ is really nice; get the fastest one you can afford so it takes longer to become obsolete.

If you are dead-set on going with a LGA775 CPU, then the P5AD2 Deluxe is good if you want to try the newer DDR2 RAM...though personal experience has shown that the P5GD1 is just as good.

Myself, I am sticking with the SKT 478 or SKT 939 form factors and the AGP video slots for the time being. With P4 CPU's in the SKT 478 being so cheap these days it makes good sense to take advantage of them.

And remember that the new PCIe 16X slot has no advantage over the AGP 8X slot whatsoever. For now, that's just marketing, until the 512MB/512-bit $1000 vid cards arrive and you get one.

I run both the Asus P4P800 (GF's; 2.4C proc) and the P4C800-E Deluxe (my sig rig; 3.0E) at my home. Both are excellent MOBOs; BTW, the added features offered by the P4C800 are worth the extra $$$ only if you plan on using them. If not, the P4P800 is your best bet.

So, in short:

Overclocking and gaming: AMD.

Video/audio editing and multitasking with gaming occasionally: Pentium.

That's the best way to judge what you need.

Good luck.

RaiderRodney
06-10-2005, 10:43
Thanks for the suggestions everyone.

Fast, not dead set on anything other than having to stick with an AGP slot for my X800Pro for now.

Why the AMD recommendation for gaming and overclocking though? I am nervous of AMD's because this will be my first build and it is well known that Intel simply has better compatability in most cases. But, if it would suit me better I will be willing to try them ;)

So, if I stay with AGP I should go with socket 478. Is there any performace differences with socket types? I am wanting a level 2 cache of 2mb around 3.0 ghz, 800fsb I think. I have seen several Oc'in these to 3.7 with stock cooling (which I would not do, too much money to fry).

Decisions, decisions...I am going to newegg now to look some more ;f

pyblood
06-10-2005, 12:05
We recommend AMD for gaming, because they are better/just as good and more inexpensive. AMD CPUs also overclock pretty well. The Socket 939 Athlon 64s are really good performers.

I havenít heard of any recent compatibility issues with AMD. As a matter of fact, a lot of companies are starting to sway toward AMD. AMD has really proven itself over the years.

I am not real sure about a performance difference between 2 two sockets. I can remember when socket 775 first came out, they benchmarked it against 478, and 478 usually came out on top. Since then, they have release several new chipsets and CPUs and they no longer compare the results to socket 478.

One of the advantages of 775 is that you can get Windows 64 is that impresses you at all. I would not recommend DDR2 because itís more expensive and has higher latencies. It does operate at higher frequencies though.

Take a look at this link. Itís from Tomís hardware guide. You can select 2 processors and compare their performance at various benchmarks.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/index.html

LittleLebowski
06-10-2005, 14:58
"SATA and RAID are two different things"

I nver said they weren't. If you reread my post I said that a move to SATA drives would probably offer more performance increase than a move to RAID IDE.

Also, beware of Windows 64bit. There are lots of issues with it right now.

RaiderRodney
06-10-2005, 19:54
No worries on windows 64...heck they haven't got xp fixed yet :) But, wouldn't be bad to have the hardware if I did decide down the road.

Thanks for the link on comparing processors I will check it out;)

RaiderRodney
06-10-2005, 20:26
Holy crap even the athlon 2800 ($121 at newegg) beat out the pentium 630 ($230 at newegg) in fps ;P and that was with the 630 using ddr2 memory and the amd with ddr400 ;g

Hmm...I better rethink this a bit ;)

Now I'm leaning towards this ;f

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16813131498

and this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103464

The crucial balistix memory I wanted will even be cheaper...
One thing that scares me is crucial says I can use PC4000 memory in that board...and it says PC1600, PC2100, PC2700, and PC3200???

pyblood
06-10-2005, 21:39
I would recommend purchasing a socket 939 board and processor. The 3700+ is going to be the fastest 754 CPU that AMD is going to produce. The socket 939 will give you more upgradeability. I would recommend the 3500+ instead of the 3700+. You probably wonít see a different between a 3700+ and a 3500+ even though it has twice as much L2 cache and 200 MHz faster. Plus the 3500+ is a little cheaper than the 3700+. Take a look at the new Venice core 939 CPUs. The can operate at lower voltages, so you may get little more from overclocking.

If it were me, I would probably buy a 3200+ or a 3000+ and a good cooler (you are probably going to buy one anyways). I would try to overclock it to at least a 3500+.

The PC4000 memory will work on that board. It will run at PC3200 speeds (200 MHz) until you start overclocking. It is guaranteed to run at 250 MHz, so that is how it gets its PC4000 rating.

fastvfr
06-11-2005, 20:17
Pyblood speaks truth, young grasshopper!

AMD makes good procs, but Intel doesn't want you to know that!

As I said, for a mulitmedia machine that will need to do several things simultaneously, get a Pentium.

If you want a screaming gaming rig, look at the Socket 939 Athlon 64's....but skip the 64-bit XP for now.

Way too many driver problems right now for it to be useful.

And trust me when I say that avoiding the SKT 754 Athlons is wise...that is an obsolete form factor. I use 'em only for workstations and email boxes.

Good luck!

PS. PC3200 is really all you need. Only invest in the PC4000, 4500 or PC5000 RAM if you are going to OC that CPU to the max.

RaiderRodney
06-12-2005, 12:21
OK thanks for all the help and suggestions everyone. I am glad I got educated a little on AMD's ;f

Here are my updated plans:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16813131510

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103539

MSI has a NVIDIA nForce3 Ultra motherboard I like too....so not set on that, but I do like the 1mb cache on the athlon 3700 san diego ;)

Trying to decide on a good case and PS now. I am limited to 19" high and will probably want a 450W PS.

Then the hard part...talking the better half into letting me get this stuff ;g

pyblood
06-12-2005, 15:41
I don't think that the extra 512kb of cache will make that big of a difference in performance. I would coose the 3500+ and save the extra $.

For some reason, I like the NVIDIA chipset better than the VIA chipset. Unfortunately ASUS doesnít make an NVIDIA based 939 board, so my 1st choice would be the MSI board, with Gigabyte as a 2nd option.

Like I have said before, I would choose a reputable PS company like Antec, Thermaltake, and Cooler Master.

Good luck with the better half. You may have to buy her something in order to butter up to her.

stooxie
06-13-2005, 11:02
Originally posted by RaiderRodney
Ok I am pretty much up to date on things...except for RAID configurations. I am thinking of upgrading and wanted to get some facts about RAID. Would someone care to tell me the different setups, pros, cons, etc. Anf in their opinion what setup would be best for me...which would primarily be gaming.

thanks a bunch :)

Not sure anything here answered your question.

RAID setups can help you getter speed and/or reliability from a bunch of cheap disks.

The question for you is, what are you trying to do? Survive a drive failure? Get better speed? What?

The downsides to RAID are pretty consistent: RAID hardware costs money and, if you do it with software, take CPU cycles. With every RAID setup except striping you lose raw storage space. With pure striping you are now more vulnerable to drive loss.

-Stooxie

RaiderRodney
06-13-2005, 12:14
Originally posted by stooxie
Not sure anything here answered your question.

RAID setups can help you getter speed and/or reliability from a bunch of cheap disks.

The question for you is, what are you trying to do? Survive a drive failure? Get better speed? What?

The downsides to RAID are pretty consistent: RAID hardware costs money and, if you do it with software, take CPU cycles. With every RAID setup except striping you lose raw storage space. With pure striping you are now more vulnerable to drive loss.

-Stooxie

Yeah, I kinda got off onto my upgrade plans :) I would like to increase performance and protect against drive failure as well. I will be using my old IDE Hd's as well...no sata yet for me as I have to much invested.

What kind of RAID would you suggest for my situation?

LittleLebowski
06-13-2005, 12:15
Go RAID 0 for performance and just hang a firewire drive off of your system to backup to periodically.

stooxie
06-13-2005, 14:19
Originally posted by RaiderRodney
Yeah, I kinda got off onto my upgrade plans :) I would like to increase performance and protect against drive failure as well. I will be using my old IDE Hd's as well...no sata yet for me as I have to much invested.

What kind of RAID would you suggest for my situation?

Depends on the RAID controller. The simplest thing you can do is use mirroring with round-robin reads. That will give you slower writes but reads can be much faster since you have two spindles. That's RAID 1.

RAID 0, striping, is fast for reads and writes but you better do backups because if you lose one drive you lose it all.

RAID 1+0 combines the two but you really need a RAID controller to multiply the write requests.

RAID 5 is called parity, where data is striped across a number of drives with a parity bit. That extra info allows any one drive to be lost and you are still ok (although degraded.) The ratio of lost space is (n-1)/n. If you have 4 drives, you'll have 3/4 the amount of space. If you have 8 drives, you'll have 7/8 the amount of useable space.

-Stooxie

LittleLebowski
06-13-2005, 14:27
Meant RAID 1. Personally, I don't think you'll notice a difference with or without RAID if you're gaming.

stooxie
06-13-2005, 14:32
Originally posted by LittleLebowski
Meant RAID 1. Personally, I don't think you'll notice a difference with or without RAID if you're gaming.

That's about right. Just stick with a nice 7200 or 10K rpm drive and make sure you have enough RAM so that you're not paging.

-Stooxie

stooxie
06-13-2005, 20:39
Originally posted by LittleLebowski
Meant RAID 1. Personally, I don't think you'll notice a difference with or without RAID if you're gaming.

Actually, you were right. RAID 0 is striping (I guess zero protection) and RAID 1 is mirroring. I edited my other post.

-Stooxie

frefoo
06-13-2005, 23:24
Here is what I tell my customers....

In general...

In heavy write enviorment you are better off using RAID 1 then RAID5 (assuming the controller can write to either mirrored drive).

In a heavy read enviorment RAID 5 works well that would be what I would go with. however for every write you have to re-calculate parity, therefore expect 2 writes per application write (1 for data other for parity)

In a seq read enviorment RAID 3 is good (I doubt your home PC supports this).

What level you choose really depends on your application and what it is used for.

If you are just looking to "protect a PC" go with RAID 1 and save the money on a third drive required for "parity protection" in your PC.

If your focus is mission critical, and you need the most amount of disk space perhaps RAID 3 or 5 would be a good fit.

fastvfr
06-14-2005, 14:41
On my gaming machine I use ATA133 RAID0 and hang a USB 2.0 HDD off it for frequent backups.

I also use a gig of PC3500 RAM, as my sig shows. (yes, it is OCZ PC3200 but with the 5% bump in FSB speed it runs @ 3500...)

BTW, the NForce4 boards are loads better than the NForce3 boards. Lots better driver support and far better features/compatibility, from what I have heard and seen.

Also, I use Thermaltake cases and Antec 480w TruePower power supplies in my high-end PC's...try 'em--you'll LIKE 'em!!

My Xaser III Skull case stands right at 17" high, IIRC, but it is about two feet long and 7 1/2" wide.

http://www.bymcomputer.cl/images/VM3000A_SKULL.jpg

Plenty of fans and a Hardcano fan controller/temp probe comes with it. $103 shipped from www.directron.com...

RaiderRodney
06-15-2005, 05:40
Originally posted by fastvfr
[B]BTW, the NForce4 boards are loads better than the NForce3 boards. Lots better driver support and far better features/compatibility, from what I have heard and seen.

Unfortunately that isn't an option for me since all those nforce4 boards are PCIExpress :(

I think I will go with the RAID0 with the 2 WD 120's I have and just get me a good hard drive enclose to throw me a good size backup HD in ;)

From all the reviews I have read about the ASUS A8VDeluxe it's gonna be hard for me not to get it along with the Athlon 3700 San Diego and 1 gig of either Corsair XMS or Crucial Balistix PC4000 memory.

Think I am going to go with the Arctic Cooling Freezer64 for cooling.

I like the Thermaltake cases too Fast...just not made my mind up as to which one, but think I will use one ;)

Thanks for all the help from everyone. If anyone has more suggestions keep em coming :)

mitchshrader
06-20-2005, 21:52
The thermaltake 480 p/s is great, they are 'install and forget' ..

Far as their cases, uhm. Depends, I love the industrial look of the Lian Li boxen, and the aluminium is a bit cooler than a steel case.
Tisn't as sturdy for transporting, but in a fixed location, it sure is classicly nifty.

Doesn't glow in the dark, oh Drat!..

I've been overclocking for years, every AMD processor I've ever ran..
and airflow rules. Expensive heatsinks aren't nearly as important as the airflow through them. IF you are going to make an investment in an upscale heatsink, look at the heatpipes. I strongly recommend aluminium if you can stand it, for one reason. They usually have thicker and fewer fins, which means they don't lose their performance edge as quickly due to dust. Not only are they cheaper, after they've been untouched a few months, they're actually cooler than thin-fin copper.

here's a good example ..

LinkHere (http://svc.com/xp-90-21.html)

and here's a link to the Lian Li box I STRONGLY prefer..

LinkHere (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16811112022)

Personally, after reading the reviews on the Crucial Ram, I'd probably go with the Ballistix 3500 and OC it; as far as I know the chips for it & the 4000 are identical. I'd want to doublecheck, but thats what I remember. READ REVIEWS from overclocking sites. they push the limits, ignore hype, and sift out what Really Works.

Crucial also has promotions, fairly often, that can save you a few dollars.

A gaming box can benefit from a fan-bus. It's no more than a 'dimmer switch' for your cooling, but there's no reason to run fans wide open if you're just chatting & surfing. What works 'optimally' is VERY good fans, turned way down for ordinary use and maxed out for gaming. Don't skimp. I use (for 80mm) SunonB6 fans, not expensive but 50cfm. good uns. Do Not Buy Delta Fans unless you're deaf or planning on becoming deaf. I've used em, have a box full, love em for what they do best but jeeze they're loud.

Cables are important, and you do want round and you do want plenty long. Don't let cable length dictate drive placement.

I use this hard drive cooler, LinkHere (http://svc.com/fhc-350-rd-42.html) and have had 0 trouble with it.

About RAID, skip it. Save the time & effort, and put 2 IDE drives on diff IDE channels, both as master. Put your page file on 2nd drive, and a virtual cd rom program. Run games from the hard drive. THAT gives you mucho benefit from nothing but a proper configuration, with no risk of problems associated with Raid 0.

At least, IMHO.

You can throw money at a build, (the manufacturers Want you to) or you can do a lot of research, steal all the teensy free speed tweaks ya can, and then build for Rock Stable first, Fast second. THAT is best, but you won't prove it on benchmarks, right away. In a few months you'll start to feel smart, and the trend continues.

Make the comp Cool, balanced, and stable, and it'll be fast & STAY fast. Build for benchmarks, it'll rock for a while, then stutter.

Leastways, that's how it worked here.

Lian Li PC60 USB, Fortron 550 P/S, Asus a7n8x-E-deluxe, Mushkin 3200DDR LL, dual channel, AMD 2600m @11.5x200, Gainward Golden Sample 5900xt @ 450/780, Soundstorm audio, LiteOn 16x DVD-RW, 3x120 Maxtors, 1x250 Maxtor External, Philips 201B4 21" CRT.

Considering I built on a budget, (very tight), and that was a year ago.. this box isn't shabby a'tall. The NEW one is nearly identical, except for a different power supply. I will be using the 1300 Gainward card, though. Budget loosened up. ;)

G'luck.

RaiderRodney
06-21-2005, 10:51
Woohoo, great tips ;) Thanks everyone for the help.

I like that case too mitchshrader. The heatpipe idea makes a ton of sense as far as dust hampering preformance...I will keep in mind.

I run a virtual drive for gaming now and have the page file on drive #2 as well ;)

mitchshrader
06-21-2005, 14:22
Beware of the danger of getting it right! You will find very little reason later to change anything, and it's Frustrating..

I nearly burnt out on building after 'nailing it' once.

Sure, I can do a lot more, but this WORKS. Hard to argue with good enough..

so, for your ongoing satisfaction, leave something undone. it's good to have a goal..

;)