Hey ALL,

I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard about
the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did not
apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the HD's
in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use Office
2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input! Gunny

"Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:47E5487A-D208-41E0-B5AB-ECFB92312A30@microsoft.com...[color=blue]
> Hey ALL,
>
> I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard[/color]
about[color=blue]
> the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did[/color]
not[color=blue]
> apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
> help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
> 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the[/color]
HD's[color=blue]
> in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
> help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use[/color]
Office[color=blue]
> 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
> Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input![/color]
Gunny

It's not usually justifiable to use RAID on a home computer

Why RAID is (usually) a Terrible Idea
[url]http://www.pugetsystems.com/articles?&id=29[/url]

RAID Explained
[url]http://www.pugetsystems.com/articles.php?id=24[/url]


--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

---------------------------------------------------------------

"Seidell23231" wrote:

Hey ALL,

I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard about
the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did not
apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the HD's
in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use Office
2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input! Gunny

From: "Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com>

| Hey ALL,
|
| I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard about
| the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did not
| apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
| help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
| 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the HD's
| in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
| help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use Office
| 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
| Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input! Gunny

I suggest ONLY using RAID if it is done in hardware and not by the OS or via software.

--
Dave
[url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]

"Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:47E5487A-D208-41E0-B5AB-ECFB92312A30@microsoft.com...[color=blue]
> Hey ALL,
>
> I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard
> about
> the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did
> not
> apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
> help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
> 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the
> HD's
> in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
> help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use
> Office
> 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
> Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input!
> Gunny[/color]


RAID 0 took my perf score from 5.3 to 5.9.
Take from that what you will ... the numbskulls here will say it makes no
difference.
More idiots

My Gateway computer (2 years old) came with Raid 0. My computer originally
came with XP Media Edition and a TV tuner. The Raid 0 is for performance.
Supposedly it helps if you do a lot of media work
(watching/recording/editing).
I have two 250 GB drives, and it shows up as one 500 GB drive.
The main drawback is, if one drive fails, you lose all data on both drives.
You better have a good backup. I use Windows Home Server and Acronis True
Image for backups.

Raid 1 works the way you described... one drive holds a mirror copy of the
other drive. So you "lose" one drive (capacity-wise), except if one fails,
you still have the data on the other drive.

--
[url]http://get.live.com/wlmail/overview[/url]


"Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:47E5487A-D208-41E0-B5AB-ECFB92312A30@microsoft.com...[color=blue]
> Hey ALL,
>
> I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard
> about
> the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did
> not
> apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
> help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
> 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the
> HD's
> in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
> help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use
> Office
> 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
> Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input!
> Gunny[/color]

From: "Dave" <dave@beepbeep.com>

< snip >

|
| Raid 1 works the way you described... one drive holds a mirror copy of the
| other drive. So you "lose" one drive (capacity-wise), except if one fails,
| you still have the data on the other drive.
|

The advantage is reads are faster.

The disadvantage is writes are slower.

--
Dave
[url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]

"Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:47E5487A-D208-41E0-B5AB-ECFB92312A30@microsoft.com...[color=blue]
> Hey ALL,
>
> I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard
> about
> the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did
> not
> apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
> help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
> 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the
> HD's
> in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
> help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use
> Office
> 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
> Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input!
> Gunny[/color]


I use RAID-0 with twin Western Digital Raptor 10,000rpm disks, for OS and
the Desktop User Shell folder. Well, I actually use Intel Matrix RAID,
which allows me to have another RAID-1 partition for data on the same pair
of disks too, which I keep all the other User Shell folders.

My main applications are CAD (ArchiCAD), 3D (3ds max) and Photoshop. While
I have improved performance with this setup, it is complex, and makes
certain things very difficult when things go wrong. I do not plan to
upgrade my computers until Windows 7 comes out and I will probably not
bother with RAID-0 next time. I certainly would not recommend it to people
who are not that advanced with hardware and Windows.

ss.

"forty-nine" <110001@49.xyz> wrote in message
news:eXKQ2TYgIHA.5900@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>
> RAID 0 took my perf score from 5.3 to 5.9.
> Take from that what you will ... the numbskulls here will say it makes no
> difference.
> More idiots[/color]

I've got 5.9 as well, with twin Raptors. As the highest possible score is
presently 5.9, the true relative score is probably higher.

ss.

Thanks for ALL of the assistance. The RAID will be executed via software
"Intel Matrix Storage Console" and the hardware Intel ICH8R/ICH9R SATA RAID
Controller. I ran my score and it went up from 5.3 to 5.5, not quite so
dramatic as yours. I will read your link next, but for those using it, what
is it that you notice? For those who did, why did you stop?

Thanks Gunny

"forty-nine" wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:47E5487A-D208-41E0-B5AB-ECFB92312A30@microsoft.com...[color=green]
> > Hey ALL,
> >
> > I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard
> > about
> > the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did
> > not
> > apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
> > help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
> > 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the
> > HD's
> > in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
> > help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use
> > Office
> > 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
> > Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input!
> > Gunny[/color]
>
>
> RAID 0 took my perf score from 5.3 to 5.9.
> Take from that what you will ... the numbskulls here will say it makes no
> difference.
> More idiots
>
>[/color]

"Synapse Syndrome" <synapse@NOSPAMsyndrome.me.uk> wrote in message
news:e1n2taYgIHA.320@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> "Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:47E5487A-D208-41E0-B5AB-ECFB92312A30@microsoft.com...[color=green]
>> Hey ALL,
>>
>> I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard
>> about
>> the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did
>> not
>> apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
>> help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
>> 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the
>> HD's
>> in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So
>> please
>> help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use
>> Office
>> 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
>> Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input!
>> Gunny[/color]
>
>
> I use RAID-0 with twin Western Digital Raptor 10,000rpm disks, for OS and
> the Desktop User Shell folder. Well, I actually use Intel Matrix RAID,
> which allows me to have another RAID-1 partition for data on the same pair
> of disks too, which I keep all the other User Shell folders.
>
> My main applications are CAD (ArchiCAD), 3D (3ds max) and Photoshop.
> While I have improved performance with this setup, it is complex, and
> makes certain things very difficult when things go wrong. I do not plan
> to upgrade my computers until Windows 7 comes out and I will probably not
> bother with RAID-0 next time. I certainly would not recommend it to
> people who are not that advanced with hardware and Windows.[/color]


Oh, I'll just add that if I do use RAID with my next build, I'll use RAID-5,
which requires a lot of processing power, so hardware RAID-5 controllers are
expensive, as they have their own processor on them. But then you get speed
*and* redundancy, but it costs a lot to implement.

ss.

"Synapse Syndrome" <synapse@NOSPAMsyndrome.me.uk> wrote in message
news:OVVo3cYgIHA.5260@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> "forty-nine" <110001@49.xyz> wrote in message
> news:eXKQ2TYgIHA.5900@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=green]
>>
>> RAID 0 took my perf score from 5.3 to 5.9.
>> Take from that what you will ... the numbskulls here will say it makes no
>> difference.
>> More idiots[/color]
>
> I've got 5.9 as well, with twin Raptors. As the highest possible score is
> presently 5.9, the true relative score is probably higher.
>
> ss.
>[/color]


Shut up ... moron

Please tell me why a write would be slower? Thats make no sense at all, two
drives writting half the data simultaneously is definitly faster then one. I
Run a RAID 0 and I also have a 5.9 w/ two WD 150GB's. Big difference in
performance, everyone who says it doesnt has never run it before.

"David H. Lipman" wrote:
[color=blue]
> From: "Dave" <dave@beepbeep.com>
>
> < snip >
>
> |
> | Raid 1 works the way you described... one drive holds a mirror copy of the
> | other drive. So you "lose" one drive (capacity-wise), except if one fails,
> | you still have the data on the other drive.
> |
>
> The advantage is reads are faster.
>
> The disadvantage is writes are slower.
>
> --
> Dave
> [url]http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html[/url]
> Multi-AV - [url]http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp[/url]
>
>
>[/color]

"forty-nine" <110001@49.xyz> wrote in message
news:eXKQ2TYgIHA.5900@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> RAID 0 took my perf score from 5.3 to 5.9.
> Take from that what you will ... the numbskulls here will say it makes no
> difference.
> More idiots[/color]

Hmmm. I already have a 5.9 on my disk score without RAID.

Dave, I have the RAID 0 implemented and the 2 350GB hard drives became one
350GB hard drive. The RAID 0 consumed the 2nd, which kinda makes sense since
in theory the RAID is writing to both at the same time, correct?

I am at the point of, is it worth losing the 350GB hard drive? My score
went from 5.3 to 5.4, not that much justification.

"Dave" wrote:
[color=blue]
> My Gateway computer (2 years old) came with Raid 0. My computer originally
> came with XP Media Edition and a TV tuner. The Raid 0 is for performance.
> Supposedly it helps if you do a lot of media work
> (watching/recording/editing).
> I have two 250 GB drives, and it shows up as one 500 GB drive.
> The main drawback is, if one drive fails, you lose all data on both drives.
> You better have a good backup. I use Windows Home Server and Acronis True
> Image for backups.
>
> Raid 1 works the way you described... one drive holds a mirror copy of the
> other drive. So you "lose" one drive (capacity-wise), except if one fails,
> you still have the data on the other drive.
>
> --
> [url]http://get.live.com/wlmail/overview[/url]
>
>
> "Seidell23231" <Seidell23231@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:47E5487A-D208-41E0-B5AB-ECFB92312A30@microsoft.com...[color=green]
> > Hey ALL,
> >
> > I have an option I have never used before on my new PC. I have heard
> > about
> > the RAID 0 and 1 in the past, but never paid much attention since it did
> > not
> > apply. So now the opportunity is presenting itself and I would like some
> > help. In essence, is it a worth while venture or not? My HD are 350GB @
> > 7800, and as I understand it, if I use the RAID, I will loose one of the
> > HD's
> > in the overall scheme. So instead of 700GB, I will have 335GB. So please
> > help help out and give your advice. I use the system for home. I use
> > Office
> > 2007 , but also play a lot of RPG Games, like Oblivion and NeverWinter
> > Nights. First persons shooters are COD 2 & 4. So I await your input!
> > Gunny[/color]
>
>[/color]