RAID Vs Stand alone HD's?
Question for y'all. RAID seems to be popping up everywhere in workstation PC's. It seems to be there for the performance gain rather than for data integrity. So, lets say you have 2x IBM ATA100, 7200rpm HD's.
Question for y'all.
RAID seems to be popping up everywhere in workstation PC's.
It seems to be there for the performance gain rather than for data integrity.
So, lets say you have 2x IBM ATA100, 7200rpm HD's.
If you had two systems.
One, a ATA-100 RAID controller for these drives.
Two, an 815E based motherboard and due to a hybrid SCSI/IDE system, you had one IBM disk on each onboard ATA-100 controller and nothing else (1 HD per controller, no CD device's at all)
How would these systems compare on HD performance?
RAID seems to be popping up everywhere in workstation PC's.
It seems to be there for the performance gain rather than for data integrity.
So, lets say you have 2x IBM ATA100, 7200rpm HD's.
If you had two systems.
One, a ATA-100 RAID controller for these drives.
Two, an 815E based motherboard and due to a hybrid SCSI/IDE system, you had one IBM disk on each onboard ATA-100 controller and nothing else (1 HD per controller, no CD device's at all)
How would these systems compare on HD performance?
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
