motherboard or video card?

compres · Feb 20, 2006

WTF

my new posts apear as older?

s3xynanigoat · Feb 21, 2006

The link you have provided on RAID 0 deals with off line gaming... The results somewhat bypass what online gamers may be interested in as most multiplayer games out there require intensive HD R/w'ing. However I did ask you to show me a link and you have done this, even if the test's weren't what I was looking for, at no fault of your own since I did not clarify.

I would like to point out to you though that those tests are scored by a computer tech with a stop watch. This may be normal but I still laugh everytime I see it.

Now compres, I offer you the opportunity to read and learn.

http://www.overclockers.com/articles1063/index02.asp

http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/singleLevel0.html

Random Read Performance: Very good; better if using larger stripe sizes if the controller supports independent reads to different disks in the array.

Random Write Performance: Very good; again, best if using a larger stripe size and a controller supporting independent writes.

Sequential Read Performance: Very good to excellent.

Sequential Write Performance: Very good.

Cost: Lowest of all RAID levels.

Special Considerations: Using a RAID 0 array without backing up any changes made to its data at least daily is a loud statement that that data is not important to you.

Recommended Uses: Non-critical data (or data that changes infrequently and is backed up regularly) requiring high speed, particularly write speed, and low cost of implementation. Audio and video streaming and editing; web servers; graphic design; high-end gaming or hobbyist systems; temporary or "scratch" disks on larger machines.

Raid 0 is very debatable on it'sbenefits. I personally feel that i have seen great increases with it. Others disagree with it's benefits which is fine. I could throw 12 links recommending RAID 0 for performance, at the same time I could throw 13 links that don't recommend it. THis does not mean that either are right. Please do not feel like I am "attacking" you, Compres. It's just the nature of arguing a point.

s3xynanigoat · Feb 21, 2006

compres said:

looks like the board messed up my post, here's the link you provided:
http://www.overclockers.com/articles1063/index02.asp

Well, as I always say, it's just my opinion. However, from your own supplied link:

Conclusion

I noticed no change in load up times across the board in the games (except for Far Cry). Stipe size made no real difference in how long it took to load the levels.

As to how Raid-0 stacks up against a single Raptor, the only difference is in the benchmark scores - other then that, in real world use there is NO REAL IMPROVEMENT in load up times.

Question: A + B is equal to X, If A is 14 and X is 9 , what is B?

Answer:

Others disagree with it's benefits which is fine. I could throw 12 links recommending RAID 0 for performance, at the same time I could throw 13 links that don't recommend it.

Not trying to burst your bubble there compres.

TechSpot

Welcome to TechSpot

motherboard or video card?

compres Newcomer, in training Posts: 49

s3xynanigoat Newcomer, in training Posts: 141

s3xynanigoat Newcomer, in training Posts: 141

Add New Comment

	Social Login & Guest Posting			TechSpot Members Login here or sign up for free, it takes about a minute.
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.