One server hdd vs two normal hdd connected into RAID
-
Hi guys! I'm concerning situation, what will do the job quicker. One server hdd, for example
WD VelociRaptor, 3.5'', 300GB, Serial ATA/300, 10000RPM, 16MB cache, or twoWD Caviar Black, 3.5'', 1TB, SATA/600, 7200RPM, 64MB cacheconnected into RAID 0. For me, intuitively raid will be quicker, but some test or personal experience will be useful. Unfortunately I never worked with raid so I only know the theory about it. I know that there is double chance to data loss with raid 0 but I'm planning to buy third external hdd which will be working as a backup storage. I don't wan't to create raid 1+0 because of lack of founds to buy more hdd's. In the price of one 300GB server disk I can get two 1 TB disks. What are you thinking about such situation? The computer will work as a render machine, mostly for 3ds max and autocad as well, so the speed of disk is quite important matter for me. Oh! And I'm planning to use raid controller to relieve processor from counting all that stripe stuff. -
Hi guys! I'm concerning situation, what will do the job quicker. One server hdd, for example
WD VelociRaptor, 3.5'', 300GB, Serial ATA/300, 10000RPM, 16MB cache, or twoWD Caviar Black, 3.5'', 1TB, SATA/600, 7200RPM, 64MB cacheconnected into RAID 0. For me, intuitively raid will be quicker, but some test or personal experience will be useful. Unfortunately I never worked with raid so I only know the theory about it. I know that there is double chance to data loss with raid 0 but I'm planning to buy third external hdd which will be working as a backup storage. I don't wan't to create raid 1+0 because of lack of founds to buy more hdd's. In the price of one 300GB server disk I can get two 1 TB disks. What are you thinking about such situation? The computer will work as a render machine, mostly for 3ds max and autocad as well, so the speed of disk is quite important matter for me. Oh! And I'm planning to use raid controller to relieve processor from counting all that stripe stuff.First of all, there isn't as big difference performancewise between those disks as you might think. The velociraptor has only a slightly higher sustained datarate, and if you would consider the 1.5 TB Caviar, it's even slower. But the latency is 30% lower. It's also serverclass when it comes to reliability, which the caviar certainly isn't. So it's more about how you're going to use the drives that makes the difference. If you read or write very large contiguous files in one go, the raid system is the clear winner. But if you read or write very many small files, then the single velociraptor will be the better choice. Also keep in mind that a cheap raid controller isn't fast. Check the sustained write speed if available. If you really want a fast system, you should consider one of these[^] instead.