Duncan, In 2003, I built a new system with an at the time powerhouse AMD XP3200+. The Raptors had just been introduced and everything I was reading was that a RAID0 (striped array) of 2 Raptors gave the best performance. Since the total drive space is only about 72 GB, and the OS is accessed continuously, the theory was that a boot drive/OS usage would bring speed rewards. Since then, I have read conflicting reports for single user desktop usage. Since I have a limited number of SATA ports and 5 320 GB Seagate drives and a new 750 GB Western Digital, SATA ports are at a premium. Eliminating the Raptor boot array frees up 2 SATA II ports and a potential 2TB of storage.
So the short answer is that the RAID0 is supposed to give better performance (faster) than a single drive. Plus, the Raptors are 10,000 rpm drives vs. 7200 for all other SATA drives at this time. So 10,000 rpm plus RAID0 is supposed to give the ultimate in performance in a non-SCSI environment. I am just trying to decide if the (extra?) performance is worth the low storage capacity. Jim Maki [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: DHSinclair > James, > You are way ahead of me. Is there some real world reason you > use a RAID > pair for a "boot" drive? Excuse me. I have missed something. > Is a "RAID pair" faster than a single device (raptor?) "boot" drive? > Best, > Duncan
