Considering 2 Drives for RAID 0

[Femto]

Hataichi's firmware is why I am recomending them even with less cache, take a look at storagereview.com for benchmarks from the two companies drives and see for yourself

Interesting. I wonder what would happen if Hitachi doubled the cache? Even more performance gain?

having owned the hitachis and the perps, i can say the perps are better all around, really the only drives to buy right now.

That's what I was thinking, but really only because not very many include Hitachi and RAID in the same sentence. I just don't see it that often. Though I always see "PERP RAID OMGZ FAST FAST!!1!" threads everywhere haha.

EDIT: Due to recent belated christmas presents my budget has been extended to exactly $159.02, including shipping. So I could get (2) 250GB drives or whatnot...gah.

ZOMG - Look at these. Seagate Barracude 7200.10 250GB SATAII HDD That plus the case I'm also getting is pretty much my budget. Of course, the question is, do I need all of that space?

Maybe a file server is in teh works.

QUESTION: If I hypothetically chose the WD 160GB Drive w/ 8mb cache pair over the version with 16mb Cache ('RE'), and ran them in RAID 0 with an Opteron 165 and 2GB of RAM, how much of a difference would it make?

 

[greenmaji]

I still think if transfer rates and HTach's is your thing.. or 3D-modlening, rendering and Video incoding then the perp drives will be fine..

but single user tasks.. uhh.. the perp as been benched and the results were less then phonominal

http://www.storagereview.com/php/be...&numDrives=1&devID_0=297&devID_1=323&devCnt=2

anyone else have relevent data?

 

[Femto]

I still think if transfer rates and HTach's is your thing.. or 3D-modlening, rendering and Video incoding then the perp drives will be fine..

but single user tasks.. uhh.. the perp as been benched and the results were less then phonominal

http://www.storagereview.com/php/be...&numDrives=1&devID_0=297&devID_1=323&devCnt=2

anyone else have relevent data?

I'll be doing insignificant amounts of 3D-Modeling (Sketchup and Autocad) and I will be doing light amounts of video encoding, so perpendicular drives probably aren't for me.

I just want moderate storage, RAID (For the experience and the speed), and in my price range. (Maximum of ~$70 a drive). That's all.

 

[Murdochs_mad]

I have something like that, an old computer with dual 80gb drives, just not as fast, and it doesn't have SATA. Plus I don't have any cash for several perp. recording drives.

You could add a PCI sata controller, the software raid ones are pretty cheap, not that good for raid, but plenty good enough for JBOD

 

[ares350]

fyi there is a 150gb raptor.

I got one for xmas finally. took a while to justify 200$ in the budget to replace a working hard drive.

this is one of the reviews I checked
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/02/06/wd1500ad_raptor_xtends_performance_lead/index.html

"The Raptor-X's performance is even good enough to beat a RAID 0 array consisting of two modern 7,200 RPM drives, except in terms of pure throughput, of course. In addition, it is nicer having only one drive to install, and the data safety of a single drive is better anyway. Speaking of safety, we should refer to the five year warranty, which should give you a good feeling."

 

[Femto]

fyi there is a 150gb raptor.

I got one for xmas finally. took a while to justify 200$ in the budget to replace a working hard drive.

this is one of the reviews I checked
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/02/06/wd1500ad_raptor_xtends_performance_lead/index.html

"The Raptor-X's performance is even good enough to beat a RAID 0 array consisting of two modern 7,200 RPM drives, except in terms of pure throughput, of course. In addition, it is nicer having only one drive to install, and the data safety of a single drive is better anyway. Speaking of safety, we should refer to the five year warranty, which should give you a good feeling."

Thanks for the input, though I'm not sure if I could swallow the $200 dollar price tag and the relatively small amount of space. I'd rather opt for multiple 'slower' drives which result in more space.