enterprise vs desktop HDs in RAID5/6

[thegreek]

I want to build a file server to store all my movies/music/etc and I'm thinking of building a 2TB RAID5/6 for starts (I'll add more drives later on). Do I REALLY need the enterprise drives for this sort of environment? The server will be accessed by 2 computers (maybe 3 later on by a HTPC). It will not be doing any heavy loads or anything like that so I am wondering if the desktop drives instead of the enterprise will be good enough for it. I'm thinking about going with Seagate because of their 5 year warranty.

[CGR]

Just get some regular sata drives. You dont need anything like 15krpm drives.

I would just stay away from WD and Hitachi. I prefer Seagate and Samsung.

[JamesXP]

I've heard that the ICH9R is a little slow when using Raid 5/6 so get a true hardware raid card :)

[gangaskan]

like james said, if you get a true RAID card with onboard processing you will get more out of it.


plus the transfer rates will be up there with scsi and SAS

[CGR]

If this will just be a storage server and you will not be playing any video from it then you really dont need a raid card. Sure it will give you a little more performance but why would you need it?

If you were making a streaming media server then I could see the need, but if your not then on board raid should be fine if you have that ability

[bing]

For Raid 5/6, don't use on board raid since there will be a CPU penalty, better get a dedicated raid controller.

But if only at Raid 0, current Intel ICHxR is doing pretty well for it's price compared to a raid card.

[Joeteck]

Just get some regular sata drives. You dont need anything like 15krpm drives.

I would just stay away from WD and Hitachi. I prefer Seagate and Samsung.


Samsung? Did you even read the thread. "Who makes the worst hard drive?"..... LMAO.

Western Digital makes a damn good hard drive. They make a RAID edition "RE" and a "RE2" drive you might want to look at. They're designed to stay on 24/7, perfect for your application.

[funnyperson1]

If this will just be a storage server and you will not be playing any video from it then you really dont need a raid card. Sure it will give you a little more performance but why would you need it?

If you were making a streaming media server then I could see the need, but if your not then on board raid should be fine if you have that ability

Exactly, there will be a CPU usage penalty, but this machine is a FILE SERVER. That CPU's entire purpose in life is to manage this raid and allow access to the files over the network. Neither task is something thats going to bring any modern CPU to its knees.

[gangaskan]

Exactly, there will be a CPU usage penalty, but this machine is a FILE SERVER. That CPU's entire purpose in life is to manage this raid and allow access to the files over the network. Neither task is something thats going to bring any modern CPU to its knees.


that is true, however, i would make sure the board supports the raid levels you want


i dont think many mobo's do 5? .... unless its something new thats coming out recently.

a expansion card would leave you options for 5 /10

[CGR]

Samsung? Did you even read the thread. "Who makes the worst hard drive?"..... LMAO.

Western Digital makes a damn good hard drive. They make a RAID edition "RE" and a "RE2" drive you might want to look at. They're designed to stay on 24/7, perfect for your application.

I have owned samsung drives for years and never had a problem.

Well shouldnt say never, but the only problem I did have was after the drive was several years old.

[jason4207]

that is true, however, i would make sure the board supports the raid levels you want


i dont think many mobo's do 5? .... unless its something new thats coming out recently.

a expansion card would leave you options for 5 /10

The Intel chipsets have been doing RAID0/1/5/10 for some time...I don't think they do RAID6, though.

The latest Intel chipset (ICH9R) can handle up to 6 drives in various RAID, and Matrix RAID configurations.

[gangaskan]

The Intel chipsets have been doing RAID0/1/5/10 for some time...I don't think they do RAID6, though.

The latest Intel chipset (ICH9R) can handle up to 6 drives in various RAID, and Matrix RAID configurations.



ahh, i was not aware of that.

[thegreek]

I've heard that the ICH9R is a little slow when using Raid 5/6 so get a true hardware raid card :)
I was planning on buying an areca pci-e card

If this will just be a storage server and you will not be playing any video from it then you really dont need a raid card. Sure it will give you a little more performance but why would you need it?

If you were making a streaming media server then I could see the need, but if your not then on board raid should be fine if you have that ability
I am planning on putting all my dvd's on it and then using a HTPC to view the movies with zoom player. I don't really know how much load that will have?

For Raid 5/6, don't use on board raid since there will be a CPU penalty, better get a dedicated raid controller.

But if only at Raid 0, current Intel ICHxR is doing pretty well for it's price compared to a raid card.
Not interested in RAID0, I just want fault tolerance, it would suck having to re-rip my entire dvd collection all over again if a drive dies let alone my music collection and other files I'll be storing.

Samsung? Did you even read the thread. "Who makes the worst hard drive?"..... LMAO.

Western Digital makes a damn good hard drive. They make a RAID edition "RE" and a "RE2" drive you might want to look at. They're designed to stay on 24/7, perfect for your application.
Seagate also makes the ES series which is for enterprise/RAID use. Also, don't knock samsung, they're coming out with a 1TB HD using 3 PLATTERS (334MB per disc). Seagate is 4 and Hitachi is 5 :eek:

Exactly, there will be a CPU usage penalty, but this machine is a FILE SERVER. That CPU's entire purpose in life is to manage this raid and allow access to the files over the network. Neither task is something thats going to bring any modern CPU to its knees.
you're right this will only be used as a file server and nothing else.




I was planning on using hardware RAID5 or RAID6 for greater fault tolerance becuase I want my data to be as safe as it could be, it will suck big time losing 2+ TB of data. I know onboard is getting better but is it as reliable as a pci-e card? I also want to be able to move the array easily when I upgrade as time goes on (just plug the card into the new MB and be done) rather than messing with the onboard and have compatability problems when switching to a new MB.

Also, by enterprise I meant the ES series from seagate and the RE series from WD and also the hitachi series NOT any scsi drives (too expensive).

[Joeteck]

Seagate also makes the ES series which is for enterprise/RAID use. Also, don't knock samsung, they're coming out with a 1TB HD using 3 PLATTERS (334MB per disc). Seagate is 4 and Hitachi is 5 :eek:
.

Also, everyone should be aware of the more density the platters become the more likely for corruption and lost data will occur.

I'll take the 4 or 5 platter drive any day for security..

[MadMan007]

Imo unless you're streaming multiple videos off the HDs a good on-board RAId controller would suffice. A Gigabit wired network will have slower transfer rates than a RAID 5 made up of decent HDs ;) so the on-board itself will not limit you. However there is one advantage to a card-based approach and that is transfer-ability. You would be able to move the RAID array to any other system you want at any time assuming it has the needed expansion slot. I'd just consider getting a smaller separate drive for the OS through the mobo.

[thegreek]

Imo unless you're streaming multiple videos off the HDs a good on-board RAId controller would suffice. A Gigabit wired network will have slower transfer rates than a RAID 5 made up of decent HDs ;) so the on-board itself will not limit you. However there is one advantage to a card-based approach and that is transfer-ability. You would be able to move the RAID array to any other system you want at any time assuming it has the needed expansion slot. I'd just consider getting a smaller separate drive for the OS through the mobo.

transfer-ability is a big plus and the ability to add more drives 8-12 depending on controller.