Best RAID Configuration for Gaming - Cheat Happens General Discussions Message Board (Page 1)
Cheat Happens Game Cheats and Wallpapers
Cheat Happens Game Cheats and Wallpapers
 
Cheat Happens Game Cheats and Wallpapers
 
     TRAINERS       REQUESTS       GAME REVIEWS       GAME WALLPAPERS       BOARDS
-OR-
 
     
  MESSAGE BOARD LINKS:   SIGNUP    |    BOARDS HOME    |   MY FAVORITE BOARDS    |   NEWEST POSTS    |   MY THREADS  
 
GENERAL DISCUSSIONS MESSAGE BOARD
 
   
SEARCH BOARDS:  
SEARCH THIS BOARD ONLY  
SEARCH HEADERS ONLY  
 
           
   Page 1 of 2     First Page     Previous Page     Next Page     Last Page  New Topic New Topic    New Poll New Poll    Post Reply Post Reply    Help Help   
 
 MESSAGE BOARDS >> GENERAL DISCUSSIONS
 Best RAID Configuration for Gaming  
 
 
Current rank: 2 Stars. Next Rank at 1000 Posts.

Send a PM to AdmiralP
ELITE
AdmiralP
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

United States 
User #: 400774
Posts: 736 
Joined: Mar 02, 2008   
Last visit: Apr 29, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 9:26:36 AM - Report post  (0)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

In the next couple of weeks I am going to rebuild my gaming rig. I have never run a RAID configuration on any of my builds previously. However, I am considering one this-go-round. From what I have read the two best options appear to be RAID 0 or RAID 5. I believe that many of you run your systems in a RAID configuration to improve performance. Therefore, I am asking the community to provide some advice before I proceed. Also, is there any gain in purchasing a separate RAID controller card vs. the built-in one on the motherboard I intend to purchase? Any help will be great peeps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Mistakes- Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as an example to others.
Current rank: 1 Star. Next Rank at 100 Posts.

Send a PM to Veronica-Garcia
MEMBER
Veronica-Garcia
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

Spain 
User #: 1361364
Posts: -22 
Joined: Apr 25, 2012   
Last visit: Feb 16, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 9:31:14 AM - Report post  (0)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

What is RAID? Sorry for asking instead of answering. I'm a little curious.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>[[ Veronica ]]<<
Current rank: 2 Stars. Next Rank at 1000 Posts.

Send a PM to AdmiralP
ELITE
AdmiralP
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

United States 
User #: 400774
Posts: 736 
Joined: Mar 02, 2008   
Last visit: Apr 29, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 9:38:48 AM - Report post  (0)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

It is a redundant array of independent disks. Here is the wiki: Link.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Mistakes- Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as an example to others.
Current rank: 3.5 Stars. Next Rank at 8000 Posts.

Send a PM to DABhand
AUTHOR
DABhand
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

United Kingdom 
User #: 157287
Posts: 5261 
Joined: Aug 27, 2006   
Last visit: Jul 28, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 4:25:14 PM - Report post  (1)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

RAID 10 is best... it offers speed and stability.. which requires 4 HDD's. 2 for Raid 0 and 2 for raid 1

People would go for 4 HDD's on RAID 0.. ok its great speed, but it carries a huge risk of problems...

People don't understand what RAID settings are, they just read a little bit and think they know it and when something goes wrong they blame hardware rather than themselves for not doing it right.

Raid 0 is fast because its a combined speed of all drives in the array, for instance say 3 drives in raid 0

1st drive reads at 80MB/s
2nd drive reads at 62MB/s
3rd drive reads at 70MB/s

The total speed would be 212MB/s.. the reason is this...

RAID 0 stores data on all 3 drives, but in pieces, one drive will get 1/3 of the data, so will the 2nd and 3rd drive.. not one drive contains 100% of a file. So when you access a file it has to access all 3 drives simultaneously which means all drives speeds are added.

The one bad thing is, if one drive fails, every file in the Array is now dead until that drive doesn't fail, and if its a windows system file it could kill the whole array forcing the user to reinstall windows etc..

Now RAID 10, offers both speed and reliability, but as said requires at least 4 drives to do so..

2 in RAID 0 for the speed
2 in RAID 1 for the reliability

Reliability because the RAID 1 array is a photocopy essentially of their tied drive in the RAID 0 array, so if one of the drives fail the data is recopied back into the array on the disc that failed. So essentially it will never fail, well 99% of the time it won't :P

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great site for new games with constant deals

Click Here for G2Play for great deals

Oh and Don't forget some tuts on ASM and defeating DMA

Clicky Here for them
Current rank: 2 Stars. Next Rank at 1000 Posts.

Send a PM to AdmiralP
ELITE
AdmiralP
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

United States 
User #: 400774
Posts: 736 
Joined: Mar 02, 2008   
Last visit: Apr 29, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 6:35:15 PM - Report post  (0)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

Is the speed increase worthwhile? That seems like a costly configuration, at least with the amount of HDD capacity I hope to retain. At present I run with four HDD's: one 250GB for my OS; one 1TB for my games; one 1TB for music, movies, pictures, etc.; & one 1TB for backup. At present my HDD for games is almost maxed out (16G remaining... and a handful of my games are on my OS drive). Granted, I could remove some of the games, but I like having access to the older games for when I am feeling a little nostalgic. In order to run a RAID configuration in RAID 10, it sounds like I would want four 3TB HDD's. That pushes the rig in an expense direction I do not know if I am willing to go with. Plus I have read in a couple of places that RAID configurations do not fair well on the 1TB and larger HDD's. Will a RAID 10 (or any RAID) configuration increase FPS or will it simply improve load times?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Mistakes- Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as an example to others.
Current rank: 3 Stars. Next Rank at 4000 Posts.

Send a PM to saurabhfzd
ELITE
saurabhfzd
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

India 
User #: 433728
Posts: 2625 
Joined: Apr 21, 2008   
Last visit: Feb 07, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 8:54:35 PM - Report post  (0)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

 quote:
 originally posted by DABhand:

RAID 10 is best... it offers speed and stability.. which requires 4 HDD's. 2 for Raid 0 and 2 for raid 1

People would go for 4 HDD's on RAID 0.. ok its great speed, but it carries a huge risk of problems...

People don't understand what RAID settings are, they just read a little bit and think they know it and when something goes wrong they blame hardware rather than themselves for not doing it right.

Raid 0 is fast because its a combined speed of all drives in the array, for instance say 3 drives in raid 0

1st drive reads at 80MB/s
2nd drive reads at 62MB/s
3rd drive reads at 70MB/s

The total speed would be 212MB/s.. the reason is this...

RAID 0 stores data on all 3 drives, but in pieces, one drive will get 1/3 of the data, so will the 2nd and 3rd drive.. not one drive contains 100% of a file. So when you access a file it has to access all 3 drives simultaneously which means all drives speeds are added.

The one bad thing is, if one drive fails, every file in the Array is now dead until that drive doesn't fail, and if its a windows system file it could kill the whole array forcing the user to reinstall windows etc..

Now RAID 10, offers both speed and reliability, but as said requires at least 4 drives to do so..

2 in RAID 0 for the speed
2 in RAID 1 for the reliability

Reliability because the RAID 1 array is a photocopy essentially of their tied drive in the RAID 0 array, so if one of the drives fail the data is recopied back into the array on the disc that failed. So essentially it will never fail, well 99% of the time it won't :P

i posted this in another thread with a similar theme but nobody responded...so here i am again.

my limited understanding of RAID was hinting towards a RAID 10 being the best balance between speed and reliability. but here's what i really want to know:

in terms of actual performance would RAID 10 be faster than an SSD?

would RAID 10 be faster than a Veloci-Raptor HDD?

which of the 3 would be the fastest?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Do you know the difference between education and experience? Education is when you read the fine print; experience is what you get when you don't"

Current rank: 2 Stars. Next Rank at 1000 Posts.

Send a PM to AdmiralP
ELITE
AdmiralP
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

United States 
User #: 400774
Posts: 736 
Joined: Mar 02, 2008   
Last visit: Apr 29, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 9:40:56 PM - Report post  (0)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

 quote:
 originally posted by saurabhfzd:

 quote:
 originally posted by DABhand:

RAID 10 is best... it offers speed and stability.. which requires 4 HDD's. 2 for Raid 0 and 2 for raid 1

People would go for 4 HDD's on RAID 0.. ok its great speed, but it carries a huge risk of problems...

People don't understand what RAID settings are, they just read a little bit and think they know it and when something goes wrong they blame hardware rather than themselves for not doing it right.

Raid 0 is fast because its a combined speed of all drives in the array, for instance say 3 drives in raid 0

1st drive reads at 80MB/s
2nd drive reads at 62MB/s
3rd drive reads at 70MB/s

The total speed would be 212MB/s.. the reason is this...

RAID 0 stores data on all 3 drives, but in pieces, one drive will get 1/3 of the data, so will the 2nd and 3rd drive.. not one drive contains 100% of a file. So when you access a file it has to access all 3 drives simultaneously which means all drives speeds are added.

The one bad thing is, if one drive fails, every file in the Array is now dead until that drive doesn't fail, and if its a windows system file it could kill the whole array forcing the user to reinstall windows etc..

Now RAID 10, offers both speed and reliability, but as said requires at least 4 drives to do so..

2 in RAID 0 for the speed
2 in RAID 1 for the reliability

Reliability because the RAID 1 array is a photocopy essentially of their tied drive in the RAID 0 array, so if one of the drives fail the data is recopied back into the array on the disc that failed. So essentially it will never fail, well 99% of the time it won't :P

i posted this in another thread with a similar theme but nobody responded...so here i am again.

my limited understanding of RAID was hinting towards a RAID 10 being the best balance between speed and reliability. but here's what i really want to know:

in terms of actual performance would RAID 10 be faster than an SSD?

would RAID 10 be faster than a Veloci-Raptor HDD?

which of the 3 would be the fastest?

Sorry to hijack your topic saurabhfzd. I ran a search of the boards and was unable to find anything... apparently I just did not look hard enough.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Mistakes- Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as an example to others.
Current rank: 3 Stars. Next Rank at 4000 Posts.

Send a PM to saurabhfzd
ELITE
saurabhfzd
  send PM
  view profile
  add to friends

India 
User #: 433728
Posts: 2625 
Joined: Apr 21, 2008   
Last visit: Feb 07, 2014
Posted: May 08, 2012 10:29:05 PM - Report post  (0)  (0)       Post Reply  post reply  

 quote:
 originally posted by The Admiral:

 quote:
 originally posted by saurabhfzd:

 quote:
 originally posted by DABhand:

RAID 10 is best... it offers speed and stability.. which requires 4 HDD's. 2 for Raid 0 and 2 for raid 1

People would go for 4 HDD's on RAID 0.. ok its great speed, but it carries a huge risk of problems...

People don't understand what RAID settings are, they just read a little bit and think they know it and when something goes wrong they blame hardware rather than themselves for not doing it right.

Raid 0 is fast because its a combined speed of all drives in the array, for instance say 3 drives in raid 0

1st drive reads at 80MB/s
2nd drive reads at 62MB/s
3rd drive reads at 70MB/s

The total speed would be 212MB/s.. the reason is this...

RAID 0 stores data on all 3 drives, but in pieces, one drive will get 1/3 of the data, so will the 2nd and 3rd drive.. not one drive contains 100% of a file. So when you access a file it has to access all 3 drives simultaneously which means all drives speeds are added.

The one bad thing is, if one drive fails, every file in the Array is now dead until that drive doesn't fail, and if its a windows system file it could kill the whole array forcing the user to reinstall windows etc..

Now RAID 10, offers both speed and reliability, but as said requires at least 4 drives to do so..

2 in RAID 0 for the speed
2 in RAID 1 for the reliability

Reliability because the RAID 1 array is a photocopy essentially of their tied drive in the RAID 0 array, so if one of the drives fail the data is recopied back into the array on the disc that failed. So essentially it will never fail, well 99% of the time it won't :P

i posted this in another thread with a similar theme but nobody responded...so here i am again.

my limited understanding of RAID was hinting towards a RAID 10 being the best balance between speed and reliability. but here's what i really want to know:

in terms of actual performance would RAID 10 be faster than an SSD?

would RAID 10 be faster than a Veloci-Raptor HDD?

which of the 3 would be the fastest?

Sorry to hijack your topic saurabhfzd. I ran a search of the boards and was unable to find anything... apparently I just did not look hard enough.

wasn't exactly the same but similar as in relating to HDDs.
Link

u're not hijacking my topic...if anything i'm hijacking urs

...my question still remains un-answered.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Do you know the difference between education and experience? Education is when you read the fine print; experience is what you get when you don't"

Page 1 of 2     First Page     Previous Page     Next Page     Last Page
Go to page: 2 
All times are (GMT -08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada). Current time is 2:14:29 PM
Return to General Discussions Message Board 2237 users online.   2131 guests / 106 members.
 
     
 
 
Trainer Troubleshooting Guide        Cheat Terms and Tutorials        Anti-Virus Notifications        Site Help / FAQ        Submit Cheats        Our Friends and Affiliates        About Us
      Copyright © 2001 - 2014  webworks, LLC  All Rights Reserved    -   DISCLAIMER    -   PRIVACY POLICY    -   TERMS OF SERVICE