RAID 0 - would it cut load time in half?

claycad · 07-07-2008, 12:54 PM

If I hooked two 250GB 32MB cache SATA II hard drives up in RAID 0, what kind of read and write speed performance would I see? Would the read write performance even be noticeable since the HDD is already SATA II with 32MB cache?

I mainly would like to see increased performance in opening large project files. I work with photoshop files that are sometime hundreds of MB in size and it seems to take them forever to open them in photoshop. Same with alot of other adobe projects I work on.

Lets say I had a 200MB psd file, in RAID 0 there would be 100MB on each disk, right? So instead of loading the full 200MB file from one disk, it would simultaneously load 100MB from each disk which could theoretically cut the load time in half, right? or am I way off?

Thanks

**tecknomage** · 07-07-2008, 01:08 PM

Have you read the specs on RAID?

Note the Operating system based ("software RAID") section in the ref article.

claycad · 07-07-2008, 01:45 PM

wow, that was a confusing read...I think it brings me more questions then answers. Do I interpret this correctly?

So it would use a small amount of CPU resources to run the RAID software, right? That shouldn't be a problem. I have an AMD x2 6000, so I can spare a little bit of my CPU.

To get peak performance I need fast busses (that means the speed that data travels from my HDD to the CPU to the RAM, am I close to being right?) the faster the less data congestion, right? my CPU has a 2000MHz HT, HDD is SATA II 3GB/s 32MB cache, RAM is 3GB 667MHz.

The wiki page says that RAID 0 has increase performance, but doesn't explain how much I would see. Given the specs above, is there a way to determine how much increased speed I would get when opening huge project files?

Also, would I have to set up the RAID 0 before installing my OS or can it be set up after the OS is already installed on one drive?

Thanks for the help.

EDIT: also, my motherboard has a RAID controller built into it, I have to go into the BIOS to set up the RAID configuration. Would that be considered hardware or software based RAID? I'm assuming hardware.

claycad · 07-07-2008, 02:25 PM

Okay, after some googleing I found some benchmarks. Of course these are for 2004 and are on IDE drive, not SATA. for the start up in XP there was about a 3 MB/s increase in RAID 0, for loading applications there was a 0.5 MB/s increase in RAID 0, and for copying files there was a 10 MB/s increase. But would these be significantly better using a SATA II drive?

Also that still doesn't give me a clue to what I want to know. I'm not to worried about how much faster an application will load or faster boot times. I just want to cut the time it takes to open a large psd or similar file. Can't seem to find any benchmarks on this yet.

07-07-2008, 12:54 PM	#1 (permalink)
claycad Registered User Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: WV Posts: 62 OS: Vista Home Premium	RAID 0 - would it cut load time in half? If I hooked two 250GB 32MB cache SATA II hard drives up in RAID 0, what kind of read and write speed performance would I see? Would the read write performance even be noticeable since the HDD is already SATA II with 32MB cache? I mainly would like to see increased performance in opening large project files. I work with photoshop files that are sometime hundreds of MB in size and it seems to take them forever to open them in photoshop. Same with alot of other adobe projects I work on. Lets say I had a 200MB psd file, in RAID 0 there would be 100MB on each disk, right? So instead of loading the full 200MB file from one disk, it would simultaneously load 100MB from each disk which could theoretically cut the load time in half, right? or am I way off? Thanks

07-07-2008, 01:08 PM	#2 (permalink)
tecknomage TSF Enthusiast Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 928 OS: WinXP Pro SP3	Re: RAID 0 - would it cut load time in half? Have you read the specs on RAID? Note the Operating system based ("software RAID") section in the ref article. __________________ Tecknomage Computer System Specialist IT Technician

07-07-2008, 01:45 PM	#3 (permalink)
claycad Registered User Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: WV Posts: 62 OS: Vista Home Premium	Re: RAID 0 - would it cut load time in half? wow, that was a confusing read...I think it brings me more questions then answers. Do I interpret this correctly? So it would use a small amount of CPU resources to run the RAID software, right? That shouldn't be a problem. I have an AMD x2 6000, so I can spare a little bit of my CPU. To get peak performance I need fast busses (that means the speed that data travels from my HDD to the CPU to the RAM, am I close to being right?) the faster the less data congestion, right? my CPU has a 2000MHz HT, HDD is SATA II 3GB/s 32MB cache, RAM is 3GB 667MHz. The wiki page says that RAID 0 has increase performance, but doesn't explain how much I would see. Given the specs above, is there a way to determine how much increased speed I would get when opening huge project files? Also, would I have to set up the RAID 0 before installing my OS or can it be set up after the OS is already installed on one drive? Thanks for the help. EDIT: also, my motherboard has a RAID controller built into it, I have to go into the BIOS to set up the RAID configuration. Would that be considered hardware or software based RAID? I'm assuming hardware. Last edited by claycad; 07-07-2008 at 01:48 PM. Reason: addition

07-07-2008, 02:25 PM	#4 (permalink)
claycad Registered User Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: WV Posts: 62 OS: Vista Home Premium	Re: RAID 0 - would it cut load time in half? Okay, after some googleing I found some benchmarks. Of course these are for 2004 and are on IDE drive, not SATA. for the start up in XP there was about a 3 MB/s increase in RAID 0, for loading applications there was a 0.5 MB/s increase in RAID 0, and for copying files there was a 10 MB/s increase. But would these be significantly better using a SATA II drive? Also that still doesn't give me a clue to what I want to know. I'm not to worried about how much faster an application will load or faster boot times. I just want to cut the time it takes to open a large psd or similar file. Can't seem to find any benchmarks on this yet.