i NEED a raid card

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by michelin man, Jun 18, 2008.

  1. michelin man

    michelin man IDB Construction

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,660
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin
    for home media server
    needs to have 8 ports
    <$300 ?


    i noobed myself by trying to let the mobo handle the raid.
     
  2. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    mobo raid from most consumer mobos is fail and aids.

    the only mobos that do decent raid are server-grade boards.
     
  3. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    wat type? SATA-II?
    wat bus? PCI-Ex1?
     
  4. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
  5. Bencorn

    Bencorn New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ames, IA
    I have a rocketraid card and I love it. I would recommend them as well. I think P07 was the one who recommended it to me in the first place and I'm glad I got it.
     
  6. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    :h5:

    I'd rather have an Adaptec/HP/Intel... but those are all 3x the cost.... For most people (including my personal workstation) the RocketRAID cards are an excellent value!
     
  7. michelin man

    michelin man IDB Construction

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,660
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin
    SATA-II
    PCI-E

    dunno about the other stuff.

    would be nice to find one that is easy to expand and swap drives.

    ------
    P07, how long would you guess it take to transfer a 4gb file from your desktop to the raid setup (on your workstation)?
     
  8. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
  9. michelin man

    michelin man IDB Construction

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,660
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin
    thanks!

    x8 and x16 slot compatible

    how would you expand it out to 16?
     
  10. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    it's a x4 card.... so it will only use 4-lanes regardless of what slot you put it in. But a x4 card will physicall fit (and work) in a x8 and x16 slot -- although there is no performance benefit for doing so.
     
  11. michelin man

    michelin man IDB Construction

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,660
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin
    lane = data flow in /out?
     
  12. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    kinda sorta. Think of a highway. Each car represents data. The more lanes you have, the more cars you can keep moving quickly, and the more throughput you have.

    PCI-Express lanes provide approx 1.5Gbit/sec of usable bandwidth. As a result, a x4 card has a theoretical bandwidth of 6Gbit/sec or 768MByte/sec. That's more than sufficient for a RAID controller.
     
  13. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are PCI-Express lanes truly parallel, or can they combine?
     
  14. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    parallel lanes essentially imply bonding.
     
  15. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Parallelism in general does not imply bonding. That's why I asked.
     
  16. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    i am not thinking of an instance where parallel would not imply bonding... I think you'd have to explicitly say that it didn't if that were the case, as bonding is by far the norm.

    but to directly answer the question: yes.
     
  17. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    are you maybe confusing parallelism between discrete cards vs parallelism between lanes used to access a single card?

    they are two different concepts.
     
  18. awns729

    awns729 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    353
    Likes Received:
    0
    Even with 8 3gb/sec drives, this is enough bandwith to not be a bottleneck? Could you explain this a little more or point to a good article?

    Also, whys a discrete card > onboard RAID?
     
  19. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    a SATA-II interface supports a maximum bandwidth of 300MByte/sec. The reality is that drives cannot actually obtain that speed.

    Toms Hardware (I know, I hate them) found the FASTEST drive to be a WD VelociRaptor 10k RPM 16MB cache drive, and that could only get 102MByte/sec read performance.

    The very highly recommended Seagate 7200.11 32MB cache drive (my personal favorite) only sustained 81.9 MByte/sec.

    The popular Seagate 7200.11 8MB cache drives rated only 63.4 MByte/sec.

    So lets assume you used the Seagate 7200.11 drives... 8 drives at 81.9 MByte/sec only use 655.2MByte/sec of bandwidth (max... assuming all drives are running at redline). So the RAID controller still has a nice margin on it.

    onboard raid controllers use system ram. Many discrete controllers use their own, and some even allow you to insert a stick of memory in them. onboard raid solutions are almost exclusively the shittiest software-based implementations available. Even the "better" onboard raid solutions are shitty promise controllers. EMF, inductance, and refraction are common problems with onboard raid controllers, so performance is often much less than with a discrete controller. onboard raid controllers are also an extremely common failure point for mobos. replacing the mobo means a new controller, which means you generally lose your raid arrays. discrete cards make it easier to replace components without losing data -- even if the controller goes out, you can often get a new one. you also get advanced features such as NCQ with many discrete cards -- something that's not generally available onboard (many mobos have ncq on non-raid channels, but not for raid.
     
  20. thebox

    thebox New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    45,695
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seattle
    i'm surprised to see you endorsing highpoint :mamoru:

    but yeah they make some cool shit for a good price from the little experience i have had with their product. thats what i'd be looking at.
     
  21. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are Raptors and VelociRaptors the same thing, or is the VelociRaptor a newer model?
     
  22. thebox

    thebox New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    45,695
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seattle
    velociraptors are new, been out for like a month or so IIRC
     
  23. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmm. I wonder how much better they are compared to my Raptors.

    I'd like to see a 10krpm 2.5" SATA drive. I know they have them for SAS, but I'm not that rich.

    EDIT: Oh shit, it is a 2.5" drive! :noes: Now allz I need is four of them plugged into this bad boy:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2008
  24. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    meh I'm not interested in 2.5" drives for desktops.... I like the 3.5" formfactor. It's not too big, yet allows more capacity, and more importantly -- better cooling over 2.5" drives.
     
  25. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/hard-disks/average-read-transfer-performance,658.html


    According to that benchmark, the old 74GB 16M cache 10k RPM Raptors actually did WORSE than a basic 7200.10 Seagate :mamoru:

    The 7200.10 did 79.8 MByte/sec
    The Raptor did 75.3 MByte/sec

    To add insult to injury, the Western Digital Caviar 750GB 16M cache drive did 75 MByte/sec.... :rofl:

    It seems the VelociRaptor is legit, but the older Raptor was a marketing scam (which coincides with my personal results that showed a Raptor wasn't worth the cost diff and lack of space).
     

Share This Page