Frag Infinity Tournament, Inc. - FITES LAN Party - www.fites.net

LAN Party Forums => General Discussion => Started by: Vulgate on December 08, 2005, 06:31:40 PM

Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Vulgate on December 08, 2005, 06:31:40 PM
what is better for a home PC, I have 4HDD what is faster/safer? I have not looked into raid-5. I know I would have 3 HDD of storage and i drive for parity.  RAID 10 is just a copy of a striped disks.

 :feedback:

what is better?
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: TekieB on December 08, 2005, 07:10:43 PM
raid 5 is slow writing, and is designed for many people accessing it at one. Raid 10 would provide more write speed, but you would loost more drive space to the array
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Pride on December 08, 2005, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: "TekieB"
raid 5 is slow writing, and is designed for many people accessing it at one. Raid 10 would provide more write speed, but you would loost more drive space to the array


Geek! :geek:
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: TekieB on December 08, 2005, 07:34:05 PM
Quote from: "Pride"
Quote from: "TekieB"
raid 5 is slow writing, and is designed for many people accessing it at one. Raid 10 would provide more write speed, but you would loost more drive space to the array


Geek! :geek:


no, I just have been looking at storage options recently

edit: what are you trying to do (file server, video editing, gaming?)

edit 2: raid 5 has parity across all disks, raid 3 has a dedicated drive for it
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: sully! on December 08, 2005, 08:09:25 PM
Unless he's looking at getting a dedicated RAID card, RAID 3 usually isn't a common option for the integrated RAID solutions on most mobo's.

But Tekie is right in that RAID 5 is better for multiple user access (ie, server situations). For a desktop that you want speed and redundancy, go with the 0+1.

For a more complete overview of RAID technologies, take a look at http://www.bytepile.com/raid_class.php
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Vulgate on December 09, 2005, 08:22:10 AM
well, it's mostly a game rig, but it also share's music/vids/data/dsl with 3 othr users.  currently I have 150GB of stuff and still have about 75+/- cd's in LOSSLESS quality to rip. Plus 20ish older games to install.....

I do think it's more geek to have a RAID-5 setup!
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Pride on December 09, 2005, 08:44:02 AM
Raid 5 is very expensive.

if you are looking for redundancy, go with a 0 or 1

No need for a raid 3 5 or 10
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: TekieB on December 09, 2005, 08:52:13 AM
raid 5 gives better allocation of disks, and isn't that expensive
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Pride on December 09, 2005, 09:01:40 AM
It is considering you need 3 HD's to do it!
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Vulgate on December 09, 2005, 11:00:04 AM
I have 4 drives, an NF4 RAID does 0/1/5

I don't realy need fast writes, just fast reads......

don't know, I'll look around more!
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Vulgate on December 09, 2005, 11:03:52 AM
RAID 5!!!!!!! whaaahaaahha?
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: kona on December 09, 2005, 11:58:18 AM
RAID 5 is faster
RAID 0+1 is safer

It just depends on what you use the PC for...........
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Dwg115 on December 09, 2005, 12:12:22 PM
i read a review a few months back i think it was on tomshardware but not sure and they benchmarked different raid types and bencked them against non raid machines.  guess what in most cases there were no differences and in some the non-raid machines were faster.  so if performance is what ur after maybe you should reconsider.  I'll try to find that article and post it.
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: TekieB on December 09, 2005, 01:02:09 PM
do you really trust THG?
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Dwg115 on December 09, 2005, 01:09:53 PM
well im not sure it was toms but the interview was very informative and complete.  Besides, the cost of raid is high so if it really doesn't perform better whats the point.  I'm not saying that it doesn't  perform better but i would definitly read some reviews and benches before investing my money.  I'm simply just restating the review that i read.
Title: RAID 0+1 or RAID-5 for home use?
Post by: Ryom on December 10, 2005, 05:19:22 AM
The point of RAID isn't necessarily performance, thats just a side effect of everything other than a striped array.

RAID1 as a primary logical disk and RAID0 as a secondary logical disk. Throw the important stuff of the primary, and the performance and non critical stuff on the secondary. Yummy.

Also, when you have to move GIGS of files between disks or into photoshop/whathaveyou you will notice a big difference. I certainly do :)

If all you do is play Q3 then I doubt you're going to benefit as much. Unless you unpack your pk3's, then you get read speed limited instead of cpu when loading. Lousy ZIP compression :)

http://www.trickingq3.com/misc/photoshop/forum_posted/performance.jpg