RAID in Vista x64

[CrackerJack]

I've got two 320gb WD Sata drives. Which setup would be better (Performance). Spilt the drives at 320gb or go for the 640gb. Or does it really matter.


thanks


i just stuck with setting them up in RAID0 at 320gb. And wow i can tell a BIG difference. Before i tested with HDTach, and got 190mb avg. And now i get 245mb avg. :rockout:

[TechGuy]

If you are torn between RAID 0 and RAID 1, the choice really depends on what you are trying to acheive.

RAID 0 spreads data across multiple drives and is *not* fault tolerent. If one drive goes down, the whole array goes down. Performance is increased due to the fact that data can be accessed from multiple drives at the same time.

RAID 1 writes data to multiple drives and data is "mirrored". If one drive goes down, the RAID array still functions. Perfomance is on par with a single drive, and sometimes slightly slower due to controller overhead.

Some controllers can implement RAID 0+1, which is a combination of RAID 0 and RAID 1. The best way to do this requires at least four drives. (you have only two).

So, if you are looking for speed, you want RAID 0. If you want some data security, use RAID 1.

Hope this helps.

[TechGuy]

Forgot to add JBOD, (Just a Bunch Of Disks). No data security, speed is on par with single drive. loss of one drive screws your data. Chances of failure using two drives would be double that of a single drive. Good for saving non critical data that is backed up on a regular basis. (you DO backup often, right?)

I would probably go for RAID 1. I like data security, but thats just me.

[CrackerJack]

hey thanks man, i mostly use my system for adobe app. preimire, photoshop and dreamweaver