[c3p0]

Thanks for your kind words guys. I would highly recommend the qbd76. Tested a few dacs, this one was the best.

 

[BryanP]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aynjell /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you know what you're doing, trouble would be of 0 consequince. I have a server behind me running raid 5 on a PERC 5/i and it's begging for more drives. I can back up everything (and routinely do) to this server and have terabytes to spare. Trust me, I know what I'm doing. RAID 0 has it's place, but it's usually in the same building as a RAID 5 array. One of the key things I like to remind people about RAID 0 is that, in the right place it's the only sensible option. Consider my case: My raid 0 is 600GB large, that's not very much space by today's standards, but it spins at 10,000RPM and has access times lower than most mechanical drives, while having more space per dollar than most solid state drives... it was honestly the best deal I could come up with for what I needed. 600GB just isn't enough to hold movies, music, and other data that needs to be fairly persistent. Since those two disks are high quality drives almost clandestine for RAID 0 (enthusiasts have run raptor class WD drives in RAID 0 main drive setups for years), I'm less at risk. Take this a step further I have 0 critical data on these drives, they're strictly for game installs, and my software. The only thing that might be worth backing up off my drives is my steam profile (almost 200GB by now, and saves time downloading my games again), and my save games. Everyone should know that RAID 0 is less safe than running a single drive, and should only be used in scenarios where data is not critical. So asking for trouble, some people might be... but not me. Trust me, I know what I'm doing. Also, I've never had a WD drive actaully fail. If it came good, it was invincible. My 74GB raptor in my server (for OS and whatever programs it's gotta run) I've had for almost 5 years. But again, I tend to run drives like that (old or non-safe configurations) in a situation where they're simply not critical. The only thing I got going that's asking for trouble is water cooling, considering my overclock it's not worth the trouble, but I'll keep at it.

In my old rig I was running 2x36GB WD Raptors for over 3 years @ RAID 0 and had no problems nor failures.

In fact, I've had tons of systems with RAID 0 configurations (mainly for performance) and none of them had failing hard drives.

I agree 100% that if the data on the array isn't important, there is absolutely no need to use mirroring/redundancy methods. However, people shouldn't act as if RAID 0 is a "big risk" (from a general P.O.V.). It is definitely a riskier "RAID" method since one can argue it's not fail-safe in any way, but it doesn't make any implications on the longevity of the array. That pretty much boils down to the HDs being used.

Ironically, I've had more Maxtor single drives (of varying sizes) fail on me than any of my Raptor arrays.

 

[Bojamijams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MomijiTMO /img/forum/go_quote.gif Looks like this.

Not a bad way to spend $5,000

 

[Aynjell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanP /img/forum/go_quote.gif In my old rig I was running 2x36GB WD Raptors for over 3 years @ RAID 0 and had no problems nor failures. In fact, I've had tons of systems with RAID 0 configurations (mainly for performance) and none of them had failing hard drives. I agree 100% that if the data on the array isn't important, there is absolutely no need to use mirroring/redundancy methods. However, people shouldn't act as if RAID 0 is a "big risk" (from a general P.O.V.). It is definitely a riskier "RAID" method since one can argue it's not fail-safe in any way, but it doesn't make any implications on the longevity of the array. That pretty much boils down to the HDs being used. Ironically, I've had more Maxtor single drives (of varying sizes) fail on me than any of my Raptor arrays.

I don't think most people realize that raptors are typically "entry level enterprise drives", and that means that they're practically invincible. They're designed to compete head to head against whatever is the industry standard for speed and reliability, and at the moment, that is SAS drives. VR's do great in a home environment.

I will say this: I have been recently bitten by western digital. Their decision to practically BLOCK raid on their drives means that I probably won't be looking at their products in the future. They want their customers to buy their RAID edition drives for high end RAID's. My RAID 5 won't last more than 2 days as it stands because of TREL, which is a feature WD drives have to have to cooperate with RAID cards. 3 of my drives had it, and the newest one does not. They changed the product without changing the model number, and as far as I'm concerned, this means they'll lose my business when I decide to buy "RAID edition" drives.

Samsung is looking good, though.

 

[MomijiTMO]

Just don't buy Seagate drives. I've had 6 fail on me so far.

 

[germanium]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanP /img/forum/go_quote.gif In my old rig I was running 2x36GB WD Raptors for over 3 years @ RAID 0 and had no problems nor failures. In fact, I've had tons of systems with RAID 0 configurations (mainly for performance) and none of them had failing hard drives. I agree 100% that if the data on the array isn't important, there is absolutely no need to use mirroring/redundancy methods. However, people shouldn't act as if RAID 0 is a "big risk" (from a general P.O.V.). It is definitely a riskier "RAID" method since one can argue it's not fail-safe in any way, but it doesn't make any implications on the longevity of the array. That pretty much boils down to the HDs being used. Ironically, I've had more Maxtor single drives (of varying sizes) fail on me than any of my Raptor arrays.

Raid 0 drives can fail without the drives themselves failing. A single power failure can break the raid if informaion is being written at the time. Blue screens due to system crashes can cause this also. I've had this happen even though there was nothing wrong with the drives.

When working with RAID0 ALWAYS HAVE A CURRENT BACKUP.

 

[Aynjell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by germanium /img/forum/go_quote.gif Raid 0 drives can fail without the drives themselves failing. A single power failure can break the raid if informaion is being written at the time. Blue screens due to system crashes can cause this also. I've had this happen even though there was nothing wrong with the drives. When working with RAID0 ALWAYS HAVE A CURRENT BACKUP.

This may be true, but there's one little feature in windows you can disable that in my case improves performance, and also improves stability. While I was overclocking, everytime my PC crashed I ended up having to do a file system check, what I came to realize was that unchucking "Enable Write Back Caching" improved performance in most benchmarks slightly and gave my WinSAT an extra .1 boost (since my HD was the limiting factor). After that, I realized it was just the best possible compromise, more speed, more stability, more safety.


But seriously, You guys are a laugh a minute, you know that? Who needs a current back up of installed files when you can every so easily just reinstall the game in the event of a failure.

I store nothing on my raid 0 except files related to playing games and launching software. The exception is save games. This means that my "Curent Backup" is usually abuot 3-4 GB, and can be copied back into place after a reinstall of windows, and then I'm up and running again. I also backup my steam directory, strictly because it's just such a HUGE and massive collection of games (worth well over a thousand bucks, and occupies up to 300GB).


"Current Backup" is for people who don't know where to put their files.

 

[Bojamijams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MomijiTMO /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just don't buy Seagate drives. I've had 6 fail on me so far.

So true. Never EVER buy Seagate.

 

[bik2101]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bojamijams /img/forum/go_quote.gif So true. Never EVER buy Seagate.

Western Digital FTW!!!

 

[Aynjell]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bik2101 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Western Digital FTW!!!

I will not be buying their RAID drives since they screwed me with their caviar blacks. They took away that 1 little feature that made RAID even possible.

 

[slytown]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MomijiTMO /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just don't buy Seagate drives. I've had 6 fail on me so far.

I'll attest to that.

 

[hockeyb213]

I have had good luck with WD so far except for my desktop drive failing after only being used for 6 months. That was a bit lame. But yeah seagate has big time failure issues

 

[dean0]

 

[unl3a5h3d]

Dean0 what speakers are those? Thanks.

 

[dean0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by unl3a5h3d /img/forum/go_quote.gif Dean0 what speakers are those? Thanks.

Wharfedale 9.1 in Rosewood