PDA

View Full Version : where's the bottleneck in this configuration?


Pages : [1] 2

nmdelrio
10-05-06, 12:13 PM
where would the bottleneck be this configuration?

asus p5n32-sli se deluxe
intel core 2 e6600
ocz gamextreme 700w psu [edit]
corsair twinx 2gb 2x1024 pc2-5400 c4 pro
2x wd raptor x 150gb (in raid 0)
2x wd re2 500gb
2x xfx 7950 gx2 quad sli

seems to be the cpu?

I already ordered (or already have in hand) everything except for the raptors.

any opinions?

Rayman1968
10-05-06, 12:22 PM
I see no noticeable bottle-neck. But I think you're wasting your money with the RAID 0 config.

SH64
10-05-06, 01:25 PM
I dont see any bottlenecks either.

nmdelrio
10-05-06, 02:42 PM
But I think you're wasting your money with the RAID 0 config.

You think I do not need the RAID 0 on the raptors? Is it because the raptors are fast enough?

Burner_Tbird2
10-05-06, 02:44 PM
I see no noticeable bottle-neck. But I think you're wasting your money with the RAID 0 config.

Just out of curiosity Rayman, why do you think a Raid 0 config with the two raptors would be a waste of money?

ViN86
10-05-06, 02:48 PM
Just out of curiosity Rayman, why do you think a Raid 0 config with the two raptors would be a waste of money?
low performance increase to cost ratio.

lduguay
10-05-06, 02:51 PM
Maybe Rayman1968 thinks about zero benefits for gaming (and he is right). However there is a sizable performance gain for just about any other disk intensive applications.

lduguay
10-05-06, 02:54 PM
low performance increase to cost ratio.
Not for file servers and database applications...

nmdelrio
10-05-06, 03:01 PM
Maybe Rayman1968 thinks about zero benefits for gaming (and he is right). However there is a sizable performance gain for just about any other disk intensive applications.

Apart from gaming, I do a lot of video transcoding which I think is disk intensive.

or should I just use the raptorX money for 2 large capacity 7200rpm HDDs (500gb?) in RAID 0? Doesn't RAID 0 give that significant performance increase? My board has it anyway.

Does anyone think the Core 2 E6600 is not good enough for the rest of the hardware? I am also considering a X6800 Extreme, pricey, but I think it will last me a least 2 years. At the rate new tech is coming up these days, a present-day high-end PC becomes obsolete in a year.

lduguay
10-05-06, 03:08 PM
You should be able to OC the Core 2 E6600 to match a X6800 and save your money

nmdelrio
10-05-06, 03:11 PM
You should be able to OC the Core 2 E6600 to match a X6800 and save your money

Cool! (nana2)

ViN86
10-05-06, 04:14 PM
Not for file servers and database applications...
yep. but in this context, its true.

Apart from gaming, I do a lot of video transcoding which I think is disk intensive.

or should I just use the raptorX money for 2 large capacity 7200rpm HDDs (500gb?) in RAID 0? Doesn't RAID 0 give that significant performance increase? My board has it anyway.

Does anyone think the Core 2 E6600 is not good enough for the rest of the hardware? I am also considering a X6800 Extreme, pricey, but I think it will last me a least 2 years. At the rate new tech is coming up these days, a present-day high-end PC becomes obsolete in a year.
run a 150GB raptor for your OS and program files. the new high capacity drives (500-750GB, SATA (1.5 or 3.0), 16MB cache, 7200RPM) should be plenty fast enough for you. i dont see any bottleneck in your configuration.

BUT............

be patient and wait a month or two and snag a DX10 compliant vid card (G80 or R600, whichever is better). it should have HDCP required for high def video in Vista too.

nmdelrio
10-05-06, 04:23 PM
run a 150GB raptor for your OS and program files. the new high capacity drives (500-750GB, SATA (1.5 or 3.0), 16MB cache, 7200RPM) should be plenty fast enough for you. i dont see any bottleneck in your configuration.

Yup, the raptors are purely for OS and program files and for temp folders for transcoding video. The 2x WD RE2 500gb will be for general data storage (I amd sick and tired of burning data on optical discs).

Sazar
10-05-06, 04:49 PM
where would the bottleneck be this configuration?

asus p5n32-sli se deluxe
intel core 2 e6600
ocz gamextreme 700w psu [edit]
corsair twinx 2gb 2x1024 pc2-5400 c4 pro
2x wd raptor x 150gb (in raid 0)
2x wd re2 500gb
2x xfx 7950 gx2 quad sli

seems to be the cpu?

I already ordered (or already have in hand) everything except for the raptors.

any opinions?

I think the user is the bottleneck in that configuration.

Anyone wanna dbl-check me?

Rayman1968
10-05-06, 09:06 PM
Just out of curiosity Rayman, why do you think a Raid 0 config with the two raptors would be a waste of money?

Here's (http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=1) and excellent article from Anandtech that benches several drive configs in a desktop system. The article is a couple of years old now, but I believe the results still hold true. Give it a read.

Final Words

If you haven't gotten the hint by now, we'll spell it out for you: there is no place, and no need for a RAID-0 array on a desktop computer. The real world performance increases are negligible at best and the reduction in reliability, thanks to a halving of the mean time between failure, makes RAID-0 far from worth it on the desktop.

There are some exceptions, especially if you are running a particular application that itself benefits considerably from a striped array, and obviously, our comments do not apply to server-class IO of any sort. But for the vast majority of desktop users and gamers alike, save your money and stay away from RAID-0.


And as others have stated, my opinion is directed toward desktop systems, not server-class systems.

nekrosoft13
10-05-06, 09:35 PM
low performance increase to cost ratio.

true, but raptors are sata, limited to max 150mb/s, actuall limit will be lower.

just a big waste

Daneel Olivaw
10-05-06, 10:33 PM
Raid 5 is commonly used for file servers, Raid 0 is almost never professionally used for long-term file storage, its usually for scratch partitions (video editing) or enthusiats. As you all say, raid doesn't help much in games.

ViN86
10-05-06, 10:39 PM
if you want really fast load times, check this out :D

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16815168001

nmdelrio
10-06-06, 07:12 AM
if you want really fast load times, check this out :D

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16815168001

whoa, I didn't know they made one of those. I wish they made them bigger so I can squeeze in 50Gb of OS and program files in there. and I wish I had a spare PCI slot for it.

lduguay
10-06-06, 08:55 AM
Raid 5 is commonly used for file servers, Raid 0 is almost never professionally used for long-term file storage, its usually for scratch partitions (video editing) or enthusiats. As you all say, raid doesn't help much in games.
True, but Raid 0+1 is quite common for databases servers that requires absolute disk i/o performance and reliability. Typically 8 drive SCSI configuration using 15K Cheetahs (or similar).

lduguay
10-06-06, 09:01 AM
whoa, I didn't know they made one of those. I wish they made them bigger so I can squeeze in 50Gb of OS and program files in there. and I wish I had a spare PCI slot for it.
It can go up to 4TB (if you have the cash!)
http://www.soliddata.com/

nmdelrio
10-06-06, 01:23 PM
It can go up to 4TB (if you have the cash!)
http://www.soliddata.com/

Now, that's pushing it too far. :captnkill:

nmdelrio
10-06-06, 02:37 PM
The questions never stop.

Anyone actually using the WD Raptor X 10k SATA out there?

I read that they are the quickest desktop drives so far. But in real life experience, are they worth the money? Is there a noticeable increase in performance?

Personally, with non-SATA drives, I can definitely say there is a significant performance gain from a 5400rpm to a 7200rpm drive.

Has anyone noticed a significant performance gain from 7200rpm SATA to 10,000rpm SATA drives?

I know there's a lot to read out there about these drives, but I prefer advices from real-life users.

Stoneyguy
10-06-06, 03:08 PM
Your bottleneck would be your HDDs. There isn't much more you can do about it though being yours are already on the high end performance wise. Hopefully the next gen HDDs with built in flash drive support will give a sizable boost.

nekrosoft13
10-06-06, 06:07 PM
raptors are useless

when WD releases some raptors that are SATA2, then that story will change

http://aycu35.webshots.com/image/1194/1692370849727454968_rs.jpg