Jump to content

Change Mode

Why my single HD score...


Maxst2
 Share

Recommended Posts

Was double what my raid 0 is...

 

RAID0

 

SINGLE HD

 

IM confused..and i think you would be too

 

It's IDE- yeah i know...that doesnt help matters...and they are both on a master/slave setup since i dont have another IDE on my mobo.

 

I thought...big word... that it'd have improved a weebit...not make it half as good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I learned my first "RAIDing" here and didn't bother to ask anyone for too many details and wound up in a situation like yours. On a large RAID multiple small partitions will be better score and just overall speed wise. So my advise is to make 30 to 50 gig partitions. A smaller first one would be even better but most people want at least 30 gig on the "C:" drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main thing is do you notice any effect in "real life apps" not just the test. My Raid0 runs about 150mbs. Do you have write caching enabled? This will slow raid down also as tarawa said its good to have at least 2 partitions on your raid. I found my sweet spot with mine being in the 2 partitions having the swap file on another HD, turning write caching off,and a stripe of 32k with an XP partition with only 20 although I will go lower even to 10 somtimes. gigs (as not to let windows get out of hand)

 

Edit, Forgot to mention my raid is on Raptors on sata so yours will be slower.

Go to Device manager right click on your IDE drive and see if write caching is on.

Edited by slurpy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill check that out... im outta town for a few days.

 

Well.. thats the thing, i noticed that it seemed faster on loading/installing things.

 

Your telling me that i need to have a smaller block for most performance... manual says otherwise. I read that 128k block was for best performance.

 

This is also being discussed in the pc pit stop 500 thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nah its striped... did some reading... i had some low end HD's and the 128K block is too big for it. Smaller = faster reads. 32k might be to low.. or just right... same for 64k. Im going to bet 32k might be the right number.

 

I just can't change that without redoing everything huh..lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mine at 64k. ...and yes. That means reinstall. ;)

 

not always.... I use Acronis True Image to make an image of my array then i change stripe width and restore from the backup image. takes less than half an hour and no reinstall.

 

also your using ide with 2 drives on 1 channel that will cause your array to be slower than single hd.

Edited by xtx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use Acronis also! I have changed mine several times, without a full, re-install! 64K should be the best for video performance! I wouldn't bother using Raid, until I could use SATA drives!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

not always.... I use Acronis True Image to make an image of my array then i change stripe width and restore from the backup image. takes less than half an hour and no reinstall.

 

I do the same thing, but using Partition Manager to copy partitions to an external SATA drive.

 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...