Ron,
If you want speed, then you need to be looking for SCSI or SAS drives, 15k
RPM. A high end workstation will be built like this. Its only part of the
overall performance, but for example if you are editing images or movie
files you will certainly notice it.
An array controller will speed things up marginally for a given speed of
disk, because you have a read/write cache. I don't know of anyone who
implements RAID in order to achieve speed, though. Its for fault tolerance.
Anthony,
http://www.airdesk.com
"Ron O'Brien" <castcall@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e9g5atX8IHA.1196@xxxxxx
Quote:
> Anthony
>
> Thanks for your response, which does help.
>
> I am also wondering about the speed aspect of RAID. I understand that
> RAID0 gives the fastest speeds, but offers no recovery benefits, whereas
> RAID1 offers the facility to just replace a drive (in theory at least - it
> wasn't quite as straight forward when this happened to me some time ago!)
> but whilst RAID1 speed is better than a non-RAID system it does not offer
> the speed advantages of RAID0.
>
> Which then leads to the next obvious question, would you 'actually' notice
> the speed benefits or would you just be kidding yourself that this new
> RAID1 set up is brilliantly fast simply because it is newly setup and has
> no clutter, no fragmented files, no left-over uninstall debrie etc etc
> that you 'old' PC had.
>
> Also, we all know that you can buy two identical components one of which
> could be far faster and more efficient than the other, so again, you have
> to ask how efficient the rest of your setup is, including the hard drives
> (and even the leads) when added to the RAID1 setup, again if any such
> component has marginally passed the manufacturers quality control tests,
> would their impact further reduce the RAID1 speed benefits - to possibly
> less than a good non-RAID system
>
> Ron