Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40
  1. #16
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    Hmm intresting anandtech article.
    Final words and I quote are:
    " RAID-0 arrays will win you just about any benchmark, but they'll deliver virtually nothing more than that for real world desktop performance. That's just the cold hard truth."

    So is this true?I dunno I see a lot of reviewers at the egg for example saying that RAID 0 with raptors actually does improve a lot.

  2. #17
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    10,610

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    Stolen from the anandtech link


    edit: this is farly old, the new Seagates should be much quicker as they are extemely more dense (125GB/side)
    Last edited by TheGlasMan; 09-27-2007 at 08:33 PM.


    "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
    - Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

  3. #18
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    I know I know I saw that,remember Far Cry is a 3 year old game.Heck Id like to see results for BF2 for example which uses a bit more memory then Far Cry(at least its 32 bit version) and therefore would requiere more HD access.
    And what about all these newer games?Im sure they use a lot of memory as well.

  4. #19
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Lodoss, the cursed island
    Posts
    3,524

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    More memory usage doesn't necessarily equal to larger game files. As BWM and Glasman have pointed out, game load time will only be able to benefit from RAID0 if the game files are very big.

    Marmo:
    Ci5 4690K + Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD5H + 2x8GB Corsair 1600 C9 + Palit GTX980 SJ + 256GB(SSD)/1TB(HDD) running Win7 Pro x64.

    Kanon (wife's PC):
    Ci5 6600K + Gigabyte GA-Z270X-Gaming 5 + 2x8GB Corsair 2666 C16 + MSI GTX1080 G+X 11Gbps + 256GB(SSD)/1TB(HDD) running Win8.1 Pro x64.

    Alania:
    Dell Vostro 3460: Ci7 3632QM + HM77 + 6GB DDR3-1600 + Nvidia GT630M + 480GB SSD running Win7 Pro x64.

    Moss (Windows Hyper-V RemoteFX server):
    Ci5 6600K + Asus Maximum VIII HERO + 2x8GB Corsair 2666 C16 + MSI GTX660 TF + 2x2TB (RAID1) HDDs running Win2012 R2 Std. x64.

    Flame (Linux server / F@H):
    PIIX4 925 + ASRock 890FX Deluxe5 + 2x4GB Corsair 1833 C9 + Sapphire HD5750 1GB + 2x250GB(System RAID1)/3x500GB(3ware 9650SE-4LPML RAID5) HDDs running CentOS 6.7 x64.

    Valis:
    C2Q Q9650 + Asus P5Q3 Dlx. + 2x4GB Corsair 1600 C8 + EVGA GTX560 Ti SC + 2x74GB/500GB HDDs running Fedora 21 x64.



  5. #20
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    71
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Hmm intresting anandtech article.
    Final words and I quote are:
    " RAID-0 arrays will win you just about any benchmark, but they'll deliver virtually nothing more than that for real world desktop performance. That's just the cold hard truth."

    So is this true? I dunno I see a lot of reviewers at the egg for example saying that RAID 0 with raptors actually does improve a lot.
    Yes, that's it, in a nutshell. Unless one does little more than move HUGE files around all day there is in fact little if any benefit in the real-world. What's really interesting is that anand, THG ( ), sudhian, and the tech report, et all, jumped on the bandwagon after SR published their more "real world" test results.

  6. #21
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    71
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGlasMan View Post
    Stolen from the anandtech link


    edit: this is farly old, the new Seagates should be much quicker as they are extemely more dense (125GB/side)
    For STR, maybe. But they remain dog slow for access time like all other 7200 rpm drives. Not that 7200 rpm in and of itself is the problem, because it isn't.

  7. #22
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    71
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    I know I know I saw that,remember Far Cry is a 3 year old game.Heck Id like to see results for BF2 for example which uses a bit more memory then Far Cry(at least its 32 bit version) and therefore would requiere more HD access.
    And what about all these newer games?Im sure they use a lot of memory as well.
    Also, if those files really are that large, better load up the rig with as much memory as one can cram in there to minimize paging to disk. Memory at ANY speed is still a helluva lot faster than ANY hard drive.

  8. #23
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    Quote Originally Posted by BWM View Post
    Also, if those files really are that large, better load up the rig with as much memory as one can cram in there to minimize paging to disk. Memory at ANY speed is still a helluva lot faster than ANY hard drive.
    Which is why as you can see I have 4 gigz of RAM
    But still I want faster disk access as well and I really would love to RAID 2 raptys

  9. #24
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    71
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    In storage we've seen a few benchmarks of a pair of the ADFD models in RAID-0 with outstanding HDTach results, virtually double the STR. So what the hey, give it a try and see if you really do benefit from it. I know you want to real bad anyway

  10. #25
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    I probably will.My last experience with RAID 0 was quite good.It was a friends rig I built for him,put 2 normal SATA 7200RPM drives in RAID 0 and was able to install the game Hitman Contracts in like a quarter of the time it took my old rig to install

  11. #26
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    10,610

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    I know I know I saw that,remember Far Cry is a 3 year old game.Heck Id like to see results for BF2 for example which uses a bit more memory then Far Cry(at least its 32 bit version) and therefore would requiere more HD access.
    Poci, that is loading the game level. A real world test of what you said you were concerned about. The amount of memory does not matter, and the game title and age do not matter.

    BW, I meant the transfer speed of the new drives should be higher than the other non-raptors (the better), didn't mean they would overtake the raptors. Also access time is minor in the scenaio when defragmented.


    "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
    - Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

  12. #27
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    71
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGlasMan View Post
    Also access time is minor in the scenaio when defragmented.
    Access time is never a minor thing on an OS drive. The importance of it lessens however when peeps buy monster size drives and only use a small fraction of its capacity. In that scenario a 7200 rpm drive might achieve roughly the same access time over a small span that a raptor has over its full span. Having multiple partitions on an O/S drive is also a mistake as it, too, worsens access time.
    Last edited by BWM; 09-28-2007 at 11:16 AM.

  13. #28
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    10,610

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    I was referring to the test (loading a game level), not general usage or performance (hopefully not being accessed) during gameplay.

    If you notice in the test, the single Raptor is faster than the RAID 0, shocking. My point wth the Seagate's (10 and 11) is that they would be closer to the Raptors then the standard drives shown in the test, as it is loading large files with only minor access requirements as they should be contiguous. The platter density would help make up for the lower RPM.


    "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
    - Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

  14. #29
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    71
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    I can buy that

  15. #30
    Joined
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    40

    Re: Raptor Single Drive or Raid 0 Benchmarks?

    How come there not any mention of the benefit of raid 1 with a good hardware raid controller.

    I have 2 raptors with 3ware 9650se going raid 1. Ideal for daily use but not if your system is a server.

    benefit:

    -onboard memory cache
    -sequential striping of raid 0 for read
    -improve random access reading (duplexing/sliceing)
    -improve IO handling
    -mirroring

    con
    -write speed equal or greater to single drive

    Just google raid 1, the benefits there but was overlook b/c of these talk how great raid 0 is.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •