RAID 0 - SATA versus SSD versus SAS

[Augustine]

I am designing a new version to actually use the speed of the new i7 and build another computer (the latest personal construction was when AMD just launched the 64-bit). And the Core i7 920, with 6 GB of RAM. So the central processing unit is fast, RAM is fast, the graphics are fast ... that leaves the hard drives from holding me down. My first thought was go for a SSD, are fast, but I quickly learned that a quality unit was too expensive for my level of comfort. That assault two SATA drives was my next thought. I have never created a RAID array before, but I'm using my old computer as a server to store everything (the time to buy a NAS storage and backup). So redundancy is not a question of b / c you have to separate the backup and primary storage. So RAID 0 is. The mother seems compatible with RAID 0 SATA and SAS. Please post your opinion about these three.

[Mayur_Jain]

Deluxe has the next NIC and onboard SAS controller. Historically speaking on the advice of the Asus series theres usually very little different from vanilla and e version and luxury. Just choose what suits you. Faster hard drive should increase times boot operating system, perhaps the game's load times. General copy of the file will be faster, but that’s about it. For the game not worth it in my opinion. I guess the "quality" SSD that you refer to is all SLC units, but there are some CTM now that is getting faster too (specifically, the Intel-M, OCZ Apex seems superior too.) at rest also have the preferred low write speeds and disintegration problem. At the time of a single Velociraptor would more than likely that your way more quickly than you currently have.

[Eru]

SAS drives are the novel personification of SCSI and price much more and need a specialized SAS or SAS RAID controllers are currently more or less standard on the novel servers to purchase. Though some motherboards have a better integrated SAS controller, usually the lowest point in the cache so it is best to get a separate card that lets you add the cache, but this makes for a machine of luxurious disk storage. SAS drives come in 3.5inches and 2.5inches size and are accessible in quicker spindle speeds up to 15k.

[Felix46]

The motivating thing about SAS (SCSI) is that these units can run multiple applications for I / O in the space of a single revolution of the plate, while SATA can’t (despite NCQ attempts to develop this a little). This parallelism is too characteristic of high-performance SAS so if your need for the unit for 5 I/ O, for some reason, and the position of head of the unit is in a location that can meet the request of the I/O, then you could imagine having all 5 of the I / Os done in a revolution around the pounding, taking the five pieces of data much faster than SATA.

[Yitzchak909]

RAID 0, however, is something that I used in my last two computers and a presentation improvement it offers, especially at what time I do several things at once, as well as the use of VMware computer unit for my tests, as I surf, listen to music, etc. I 2x 74GB WD Raptors 10k DATA 1.5GB and was fast, but a little stronger - but not stronger than my general system cooling fan so it was fine. For me it was definitely faster than a disk, but the real impetus when using VMware for my tests, where I met some of Virtual computer on my physical computer.