RAID 0 boot times

[Alibamu]

I am working with vista x64 Ult. and cold boot times are insanely extended. If I took 2 7200 500GB Seagate barricudas and put them in RAID 0, would I observe a lot or several dissimilarity at all. I am not certain, IMO longer. For the reason that you tranquil encompass to initialize raid. Essentially, raid1 determine to get your boot times much lower compared to raid0. Together of them determine to be superior to a single drive. Is it that the raid1 buys you a protection net as well.

[Elieis]

The Boot times differs from PC to PC. You had innovative installed PC with anti-virus program and such is able to differ from 0:20-1:20. Yes but you imagine it’s worth it. IMO, hard drive breakdown rates have merely gone up and so has the capability. With additional GBs at stake in one solitary drive, it’s even additional logical to go raid1 (or raid5 if you be able to afford). You imagine regarding 1TB of storage unexpectedly going poof. With raid0, it’s twice additional likely. A backup is alright but you cannot maintain backing up such huge disks every day.

[Emiliio]

It takes regarding 5-8 seconds to initialize raid0 at least with your set up.RAID0 does not twice in excess of the probable cover of breakdown. The probable cover of breakdown is at present immediately determined by the drive that determines to most probable fail first. This is a big dissimilarity. Nightly backups are superior sufficient for most user actually. Besides, RAID does not defend from electrical damage, fires, theft, or data dishonesty.

[Enriquee]

I am hoping somebody be able to make available several insight on a RAID 0 setup with 2 drives compared to a RAID 0 setup with 3 drives. I presently encompass 1 7200.12 500 GB drive and as of today there are 2 additional on the method. I do be familiar with that working 3 drives in RAID 0 determine to increase risk of information loss as I would encompass to depend on three drives as opposed to presently two. I would similar to be familiar with if it's worth the risk for the additional presentation. Would it be a superior decision to setup an array of two drives in RAID 0 and utilize the third as a backup.

[Enriqueta]

But you would be superior off having a 2 drive collection and then short stroke them to 100 GB with a 500 GB drive for storage. The 3 drives in raid are presently too much of a risk, and you actually do not necessitate 1.5TB on a RAID0 collection. So, short stroking to 100GB would give you 200GB of space on the RAID array. You are able to encompass quite a lot of games and software installed on your system and I figure it would be beneficial to install the entire programs/games on the RAID array and store the entire movies, music, and documents on the storage drive.

[CAILYN]

You generally utilize connecting 10% - 20% of the total size of the disks, so in your case. The 2 x 500 GB is 1TB, at 10% that's a 100 GB streak. And yes, you desire the entire games and submission installed on the collection, with a 500 GB drive for storage and backup. Well, I determined to go with two drives in RAID 0 with the third as a backup. I did a 30% stripe so I have got 300 GB for the OS and the entire software, which be supposed to satisfy my requirements satisfactorily. My boot times encompass approximately doubled going to a RAID setup but I blame that on the on-board RAID controller. My system is absolutely "snappier" with the RAID setup and programs install faster, so that's a plus. Optimistically in excess of sometime the boot procedure determine to speed up as Windows 7.

[Abhibhava]

It boots more rapidly with an SSD interlude. The going RAID-0 would not actually get superior your boot times. On the other hand, if you short stroke your present HDD collection, it is able to reduce boot times due to the lower right of entry times associated with short stroking. That's where SSD's actually shine, 0.1ms right of entry times vs a HDD with 8-13ms right of entry times. That's what makes them so much quicker.