• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Who says 2 X 74GIG Raptors isnt better than one? Anandtech?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

dominick32

Senior Solid State Aficionado
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Location
New York
Who says 2 Raptors isnt better than one? Anandtech?

To hear some of the results from other review sites about how one Raptor is better than 2, and a raid configuration makes no noticeable difference I decided to do my own testing to prove otherwise.

I just couldnt believe this argument to be true. So what did I do? I went out and I ordred my first Raptor. I posted my benching results and real life experience in another thread the other day and I can quote myself saying "I am a little dissapointed with my single raptor results. In actuality my old SATAII 250GB drive performed the same way in real world usage."

Here is a benchy of my first single raptor yesterday:

raptor2.JPG


Being crazy about PC performance, I was dissapointed with my Raptor. So what did I do? I ordred another Raptor yesterday and I just finished setting up a Raid 0 configuration with 16k striping. I want to put the Anandtech.com: "Raid is not meant for the desktop" statement to rest or at least challenge it somewhat. I am very anal retentive when it comes to my PC not performing the way I like, as you can see with my impulsive second Raptor purchase. I also understand that the review site in question did not factor in a lot of variables during that testing, including the various different serial ata controllers that all perform at completely different levels, some differences are very substantial.

My own example is that my Asus A8N-SLI motherboard has 2 controllers with 4 sata ports on each controller for a total of 8 SATA ports. The first is the nvidia raid controller with a maximum of 300 MBps, and the Silicon controller with a maximum of 150 MBps. We are basically looking at burst rates or theoretical maximum transfer rates when comparing maximums on the controllers, but it was proven that various controllers definitely affect sustained transfer rates, and obviously burst rates. So by me using the silicon controller, effectively speaking I could have downgraded the performance and not reached the full potential of a Raptor striping array.

REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE

The first thing that I noticed after Raid-0 setup, was the Windows XP installation speed. The computer performs tasks so rapidly that I find myself turning my back for a few seconds and realizing that a task is completed. The windows XP installation, not counting format took approximately 10 to 15 minutes. LOL It was rediculous. On my WD2500, this would take around 30 minutes.

The next thing I noticed on my PC after I was completely done with the XP Professional install and completely configuring all of the hardware drivers and standard software was the shutdown and reboot.

This next feet is incredible. After the Asus bios flash screen pops up and the raid0 array is loaded obviously everyone knows that the Black Windows XP loading screen comes up. With my new Raptor Raid setup (All Kidding Aside) the Windows XP boot screen flicks on and off for a total of 1 second. It takes about 2 seconds to load Windows XP Professional to the login prompt. Everything in the OS environment feels fluid and instantaneous. All of you doubters about Raid on the desktop really have to try it for yourself.

I was skeptical at first, but the performance difference realized in my eyes was like going from a Pentium-III 800 Mhz to a Pentium-4 3.2 Ghz processor. It was just incredible. Remember, this is coming from a guy who thought his single Raptor drive purchase was worthless(and I still do). Fear and Quake 4 shaved off seconds on load times and the PC in general just feels snappy. Its the way I always wanted my computer to feel but never realized how I would go about attaining it. Well, I finally realized it.

This may sound crazy to some of you, but a simple addition of 2 Raptor 74 Gig hard drives in Raid 0 has put my PC up to a new level of performance. I hope you guys can appreciate the pure power of these drives combined.

On to the benchies:
My first HDTach 3.0 benchmark with the 2 X Raptor 74G raid 0 array:
An average read of 129 MBps is just incredible. I doubled the performance in sustained transfer rates over a single raptor. I think the most important thing to note is that from 0 to 27 Gigabytes the raptors maintain a sustained rate of over 140 MBps. Considering the fact that I do not use more than 27 Gigabytes on the OS 40 GB partition, my average throughput should be around 140 steady.. :drool:

Another thing that I noticed was random access time did not even flinch. The other review site in question states that you will lose a load off of random access time when moving to a raid 0 setup. My times stayed identical from one drive to the next. Again, you see the burst speed of 217 MBps. If I was using the Silicon controller, I wouldve been held back to only 150 MBps technically bottlenecking and limiting my raid setup.

raid.JPG


Here is a direct comparison of a single raptor vs. my 2 X Raptors. As you can see I have doubled the performance spec and capability of a single raptor and my random access time has remained the same:

raidcomp.JPG


Finally, my atto results:

atto.JPG


In the end after everything, I definitely recommend Raid to anyone with a single Raptor. If Anandtech.com said that Raid is not for the desktop I say this: Raid is not for the office professional or "stay at home mom" desktop. Raid is for the dektop user that wants the maximum possible performance squeezed out of his machine. The overclocker, the hardware fanatic, the geek. :)

DICLAIMER: Please note, this is based on an opinionated review merging synthetic benchmarks with "real world" analysis based on my personal opinion. Your results may differ depending on your mobo/card controller, raptor 74G model numbers, and/or your technical computer configuration. I made my best efforts to try and not be biased whatsoever towards the Raid configuration. My best advice is this: If you are skeptical on the so called "Real World Performance, my only recommendation is to try it out for yourself.

Kind regards,
Dom


------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDIT TO CONTAIN POST ARTICLE PROLOGUE:

I appreciate everyones comments in this thread and I really hope that it does steer away from a heated discussion and stay on the point of being a pure analysis from my own "personal perspective" of raid. I say personal, because my own perspective will most definitely differ from many of you and therefore the so called "real world feeling" results will differ again from one individual to the next.

On the subject of bottlenecking that one of you posted: I do own the best video card on the market right now, basically the fastest retail dual core AMD processor on the market besides the FX-60 (x2 4800+ @ 2.6Ghz), 2 gigs of ram with excellent overclockability, and basically a top of the line configuration, if you want to call it that.

Back to my post thread statement: "Raid is for the dektop user that wants the maximum possible performance squeezed out of his machine. The overclocker, the hardware fanatic, the geek. "

I use that statement because technically the only thing bottlenecking my computer was the hard drive. Heck, the only bottleneck to most non raid systems today is the hard drive. I am the individual that wants the maximum possible performance out of my PC even if it means spending the extra amount of money on 2 raptors for a raid array, or buying the latest and greatest video card every 3 months. Theoretically even if my 2 raptors performed the exact same as a single raptor and displayed a 2% to 5% improvement over a non raid system. That 2% to 5% means a heck of a lot to a person like me that wants maximum performance out of my PC. If that was the scenario and it was a small gain, was it worth the money? To some of you, it isnt. To me, it is.

If you also remember, I started a thread a couple of days ago that can be read here: http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=441758

To the individual that was telling me numbers and benchmarks matter and the actual "feeling" of a difference does not. You can quote me on saying "I think I wasted my money on a single Raptor drive." Coming from a regular Western Digital SATA 7200rpm drive and moving up to the Single Raptor 74gig was a waste of money in my eyes. I did not notice the incredible improvement that I noticed when I bumped up to 2X Raptors. This is why I hope you can use my analysis as not being biased and most definitely valid. One raptor didnt show any improvement over my sata drive, but when I moved to a Raid 0 array of 2 raptors the improvement was dramatic. I apologize if I came off a little too "hurray hoorah, wow!!" in the comments about real world performance. Yes, if you psycho analyze my comments that may have sounded overly exaggerated to many of you, but you need to trust me on this one that I am not being biased here. I simply wanted to display the exact way I was feeling by using a keyboard and sometimes thats hard to do.

Simple math would be:

1 X WD2500 = Baseline SATA hard drive. Good performance, 7200rpm
1 X Raptor = No noticeable performance increase, or very little.
2 X Raptor (Raid 0) = Incredible gains realized, noted in every aspect of PC usage.

By looking at that simple equation I dont see how a biased opinion of PC performance can come out of it. Especially when I reviewed a single raptor one day before installing a second for the raid setup.

Anyhow, I hope this thread continues as non violent and as an analysis rather than a "Raid sucks, Raid Rules" argument.

Regards,
Dom
 
Last edited:
adamwinn said:
Why didn't you go with the maximum stripe size? I always go 32k out of habit, but I've never really done a side-by-side w/ a smaller stripe size

After massive research on this topic, I found that 16k striping is preferred for gaming and multimedia in a 32-bit Windows XP enviroment. I am sure others will recommend this striping as well.
 
dominick32 said:
After massive research on this topic, I found that 16k striping is preferred for gaming and multimedia in a 32-bit Windows XP enviroment. I am sure others will recommend this striping as well.

Doh!! Now you tell me... :bang head
 
Its a very heated area of discussion. Most synthetic benchmarks give the edge to smaller stripes while less synthetic benchmarks put larger stripe sizes ahead.

What's your drives cluster size? I've heard everything from 4:1 stripe:cluster ratio to 1:1 and everything inbetween


even though it takes a ton of time, it seems that just trying different combinations is the only way to get the best performance. just depends on how much free time you got :p

from the data ive seen, the particulars of each situation are so varied that from controller to controller and drive to drive (even w/ matching specs) the performance can be different w/ the same stripe size, etc
 
Interesting results. I'm more interested in the qualitative parts, since the quantitative parts can be difficult to measure in a real-world kind of way. I've heard other say similar things regarding the "feel" of RAID 0, so I'd be interested to try it out myself sometime. At the moment, though, my next HD purchase will probably a 15k SCSI drive of some kind.
 
johan851 said:
Interesting results. I'm more interested in the qualitative parts, since the quantitative parts can be difficult to measure in a real-world kind of way. I've heard other say similar things regarding the "feel" of RAID 0, so I'd be interested to try it out myself sometime. At the moment, though, my next HD purchase will probably a 15k SCSI drive of some kind.

Exactly. I chose to use emotion in this thread and explain the way raid feels on my rig. Not solely focus on the benchmarks. As you can see I only put some emphasize on benchmarks at the end of the thread. You really just need to try it out for yourself to believe me. lol

Dom
 
I just ran these two tests on my raid-10 array that has 64kb stripes and 64kb sectors. The results are interesting- What I find very interesting is the shape of the ATTO graph compared to your's, and how my access time is lower but your burst speed is higher.
Now we gotta find someone w/ a 512k stripe array =P


And most definitely, 'how it feels' is the most important factor.

Btw, if you are going to be getting 15k scsi's, I hope the computer is in another room or you have a really really well sealed case - Those things sound like cd-rom drives when they spin-up o_O



i just realized this drive was crazy fragmented and that's probably the reason for those weird drops
hdd9ab.jpg
 
adamwinn said:
I just ran these two tests on my raid-10 array that has 64kb stripes and 64kb sectors. The results are interesting- What I find very interesting is the shape of the ATTO graph compared to your's, and how my access time is lower but your burst speed is higher.
Now we gotta find someone w/ a 512k stripe array =P


And most definitely, 'how it feels' is the most important factor.

Btw, if you are going to be getting 15k scsi's, I hope the computer is in another room or you have a really really well sealed case - Those things sound like cd-rom drives when they spin-up o_O



i just realized this drive was crazy fragmented and that's probably the reason for those weird drops
hdd9ab.jpg

Yes,
These are interesting results. Thanks for the post. :) As well as your upper level atto results in the 500 area?? How many drives are you using and what models? I know you have at least 4+ drives in a raid 10 array correct?

Dom
 
Btw, if you are going to be getting 15k scsi's, I hope the computer is in another room or you have a really really well sealed case - Those things sound like cd-rom drives when they spin-up o_O
I hear the newer ones are quite a bit quieter. Could be wrong.
 
I have two 74's in raid 0 with a 32k stripe. Game load up times are insane, I am always one of, if not the first in any map. I can "feel" the difference for sure.
 
is the NVRaid a software implementation? the cpu usage on the nvraid was 3% higher than my perc controller (hw)
I would guess that it is - it's an integrated motherboard solution.
 
I'll buy numbers and benchmarks, but never trust anyone who says "feel". The reason is humans are just plain poor at judging things...even if side by side. The confirmation bias is incredibly strong, and I can a lot of examples...but in the end the thing that matters is the numbers. People who decide to use RAID 0 obviously either believe or want to believe it's faster, and thus it's going to warp your sense of reality (you can't get around it, it's 99% of the time not intentional...it's just human nature).

My views on RAID are that it's only really marginaly faster and not really worth it because...hey your the first one on the MAP!!!! now sit there and wait for everyone else and play your game at a lower FPS than you could have been if you spent the money on a better vid card or faster CPU, or better monitor, etc...I won't even get into array failure.

I'm glad your getting good results, could you link to the anandtech article? Also, (i haven't read the article obviously) could you repeat the same tests they did in the same manner?
 
ajrettke said:
..hey your the first one on the MAP!!!! now sit there and wait for everyone else and play your game at a lower FPS than you could have been if you spent the money on a better vid card or faster CPU, or better monitor, etc...I won't even get into array failure.

but for those people who have some of the best Hardware avail moving to RAID is an obvious step up..in my view...even if the change only helps in the smallest way possible. Some of us are performance junkies and will take that little jump. im getting my raid set up today...not because i think it will load maps faster..but because it will give me a performance boost...(even tho as some say it will be a small change)
 
ajrettke said:
I'll buy numbers and benchmarks, but never trust anyone who says "feel". The reason is humans are just plain poor at judging things...even if side by side. The confirmation bias is incredibly strong, and I can a lot of examples...but in the end the thing that matters is the numbers. People who decide to use RAID 0 obviously either believe or want to believe it's faster, and thus it's going to warp your sense of reality (you can't get around it, it's 99% of the time not intentional...it's just human nature).

My views on RAID are that it's only really marginaly faster and not really worth it because...hey your the first one on the MAP!!!! now sit there and wait for everyone else and play your game at a lower FPS than you could have been if you spent the money on a better vid card or faster CPU, or better monitor, etc...I won't even get into array failure.

I'm glad your getting good results, could you link to the anandtech article? Also, (i haven't read the article obviously) could you repeat the same tests they did in the same manner?


Good opinion,
But for me, I do feel the difference, and I do load up faster. I lan alot and my friends are always crying that im the first one in, getting to vehicles faster etc...Sure there is other factors, but hands down, the raid is truely a great addition to an already awesome rig!
 
i have 1 74 gig raptor and i defintely can see the difference between it and a ide harddrive i used. Game load up times are super fast, I can format and reinstall windows xp in under 20 minutes, and it feels just snappy. I am very very happy I spent the extra money on the raptor. It was a spontaneous purchase after I realied I had more money, and I am happy that i didnt regret it and cancel it.

My next move will be 2 x 150gig raptors in raid0. I am starting to get more into file creation and manipulation, moving files from drive to drive, dvd re-authoring, etc, and the benefits of a raid could help me out. The only thing not helping me out is the nearly 600$ price tag on harddrives alone!

I think i might keep my 74 raptor longer than expected ;)
 
aside from floppy drives or cd-rom drives, the hdd is the slowest component in your computer. it only makes sense to do everything you can to minimize any potential bottlenecks it can cause.

i have windows os and several games installed on a 7200rpm/8mb drive solo and also on a raid-0 array of the same drives, both on the same computer. i could use a stopwatch to compare the difference, but its so drastic i think an hourglass would suffice =P

btw, that raid 10 array is 5 of these:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822111151

w/ one of them running as a hot-swap backup.

next time i format the server (which i hope isn't any time in the near future) i'll build a raid-0 array out of all 5 and see what kind of numbers it'll put out :)

and no, I didn't pay anywhere near newegg's price for them. thats just ridiculously overpriced.
 
Back