RAID 0 Question

[JeeOweDee]

I have 2 36GB Raptors on their way, and I was wondering about the RAID 0 array. Am I correct when I say that the array still is only 36GB's, or does it double to 72GB? It would make more sense it being 72GB, but my research had lead me to believe it still is only going to be 36GB when the array is set up :-/

[thideras]

I have 2 36GB Raptors on their way, and I was wondering about the RAID 0 array. Am I correct when I say that the array still is only 36GB's, or does it double to 72GB? It would make more sense it being 72GB, but my research had lead me to believe it still is only going to be 36GB when the array is set up :-/RAID 0 across those two drives will yield a 72gig drive ;)

[JeeOweDee]

RAID 0 across those two drives will yield a 72gig drive ;)

Pheeewww. Thank God. I was getting worried. I thought how could it be possible it still being 36GB...but thank you for clarifying that. Can't wait for them to arrive :D

[nd4spdbh2]

Pheeewww. Thank God. I was getting worried. I thought how could it be possible it still being 36GB...but thank you for clarifying that. Can't wait for them to arrive :D


raid 0 stripes the disks or combinds the disk to gain twice the speed, so you see both disks as one... thus 72gb...


you might have been thinking of raid 1, which mirrors the disks or keeps a backup of everything.

[JeeOweDee]

Another question I have is, is the RAID controller on my motherboard suitable enough for the array I'll be having. Or is it necessary to get a PCI controller. I read a little bit about controllers having software and such, not sure if it's attainable with just my motherboard controller or not.

Thanks!

[imposter]

Keep in mind you dont get the full 36 GB =P.

[thideras]

Keep in mind you dont get the full 36 GB =P.That is if you don't do RAID 0...

[imposter]

YOu wont get the full 72 either...

[thideras]

YOu wont get the full 72 either...:confused: Yes you do...I think we have some confused people, let me explain:

Operating systems frequently report capacity using the same abbreviations but with a binary interpretation. For instance, the prefix mega can also mean 220 (1,048,576), which is approximately 1,000,000. Similar usage has been applied to prefixes of greater magnitude. This results in a discrepancy between the disk manufacturer's stated capacity and what the system reports. The difference becomes much more noticeable in the multi-gigabyte range. For example, Microsoft Windows reports disk capacity both in decimal to 12 or more significant digits and with binary prefixes to 3 significant digits. Thus a disk specified by a disk manufacturer as a 30 GB disk might have its capacity reported by Windows 2000 both as "30,065,098,568 bytes" and "28.0 GB" The disk manufacturer used the SI definition of "giga," 109 to arrive at 30 GB; however, because the utilities provided by Windows define a gigabyte as 1,073,741,824 bytes (230 bytes), the operating system reports capacity of the disk drive as 28.0 GB.

[JeeOweDee]

:confused: Yes you do...I think we have some confused people, let me explain:

He also might mean that once your OS is installed you'll lose a few gigs :confused:

[nd4spdbh2]

Another question I have is, is the RAID controller on my motherboard suitable enough for the array I'll be having. Or is it necessary to get a PCI controller. I read a little bit about controllers having software and such, not sure if it's attainable with just my motherboard controller or not.

Thanks!


naw the onboard controler should be just fine, no need for expensive pci or pcie raid cards.


And he is not going to loose space because of raid.

[tuskenraider]

You'll have 69GB of space with your Raptor array.

[JeeOweDee]

Fair enough. Thank you guys