...And yet more raid, ...

yaggayagga Havn't you heard? ... New
edited June 2004 in Hardware
2 fast questions:

1. How does onboard memory actually help a raid card. I am referring to memory directly on the card itself.

2. Is it going to not give me as good of performance if I raid 0 a 160gb and 200 gb harddrive that is the same brand and type, just different capacity? I know I will lose 40 gb, but will I also get better performance out of the raid 0 with equal capacities, since the densities are different or something?

Comments

  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited June 2004
    D00D wrote:
    2 fast questions:

    1. How does onboard memory actually help a raid card. I am referring to memory directly on the card itself.?

    Onboard memory makes a big difference. Current onboard standard RAID controllers use software to control the RAID. They aren't true dedicated controllers.

    Controllers with memory "cache" disk access, which increases the performance alot. They are normally backed with a dedicated processor on the card to work out all the math involved with running RAID. Something that onboard pseudo cards leave to your processor and software.
    D00D wrote:
    2. Is it going to not give me as good of performance if I raid 0 a 160gb and 200 gb harddrive that is the same brand and type, just different capacity? I know I will lose 40 gb, but will I also get better performance out of the raid 0 with equal capacities, since the densities are different or something?

    You are correct. If one drive is different, then there are inconsistencies in seek time, access and other factors that will slow the potential performance in comparison to a "matched" pair :)
  • yaggayagga Havn't you heard? ... New
    edited June 2004
    Thank you.

    Are all raid controllers software based right now? And do you have oppinions on which are the best?
  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited June 2004
    D00D wrote:
    Thank you.

    Are all raid controllers software based right now? And do you have oppinions on which are the best?
    Not at all :)

    SCSI controllers traditionally have a dedicated processor plus onboard memory. The kind found on most standard mobo's (promise, highpoint etc) are software controlled.

    There are some other controllers for IDE/SATA.. such as the 3ware controllers. They have some with cache and dedicated processors :)

    Picking the best is a question of what setup you are planning to use...

    SCSI... IDE... SATA.. what RAID level.. your budget..
  • yaggayagga Havn't you heard? ... New
    edited June 2004
    Okay, Well scsi is 100% out of the question, so it is based on either sata or pata. Right now I ONLY have Parallel drives and I don't intend on upgrading soon (unless a really good deal comes around), so an only PATA card or a mix of PATA and SATA would work. Raid configurations would most likely be plain old raid 0, although I may think about raid 1/1+0, but I probably won't take that route because I don't really need standard stuff backed up and a bigger hole in my wallet for the same storage. If there are other raids that are more rare that are good at performance I might consider them too, but I doubt anything is really better than raid 0 for pure performance. For budget wise, I'd rather not think about that right now, because it turns me off of even wanting to buy anything, so any price will be okay unless it is REDICULOUSLY high.

    Basically, any high quality (like with onboard memory, etc.), low demanding (does not take any resources away from the rest of the system) Pata card will do, as long as it has a minimum of 2 channels (4 drives), but preferrably more incase I decide to add some stuff to it later on, or even when I first get it. I am sort of looking for what is the best right now, and then I will work my way down until I refuse to give up any more performance.

    edit/ How would a good card compare to onboard raid on an Asus 875 chipset motherboard?
Sign In or Register to comment.