| I recently built a new PC for myself (a few months ago) and decided to put my knowledge to good use for once, and so I bought two HDDs spinning @7200RPM and used the UEFI/BIOS RAID controller that came with the motherboard, and I'm never buying a SDD ever again. These two bad boys running simulatenously are FASTER than any SSD on the market, even faster than the M.2 SSD they've been promoting for that same motherboard.
Don't buy SSDs, rise above, get yourself a RAID controller.

| their lifetime is significantly shorter, they can also easily break if moved while turned on
depending how mutch you care about the data you migth want to consider zfs or a diffrent raid setup.
you are also talking fairy tales, the fastest drives are ~200mbps in absolutley ideal conditions.
while most modern ssds at least double that
in addition you can raid ssds

don't get me wrong I love to use hard drives their amazing piece of tech, also cheap but your over-hyping them

| What sucks about RAID 9 is that if one drive dies you lose ALL the data

| I need that raid HDD benchmark supposedly faster than high end SSD

| >>669923
never heard abaranoout raid 9 in my life.
- raid 0 for the reckless
- raid 50 for the truly paranoid
- raid 60 for the mentally ill

| >>669954
using any raid with 10+ drives is for the mentally ill

| >>669978
yeah but keep in mind the number is not the amount of drives, it's the raid configuration. In a RAID 60 (aka 6+0), more than half of your data is redundant.

| Any kind of RAID is completely unnecessary and a waste of electronics, money and time for any non-enterprise setup.

RAID is for assuring reliability in case of drive failures on stuff like datacenters which are SLA'd, not for looking at crystaldiskmark numbers.

Plus, if you really think that a raid 0 is faster than a ssd this means that your knowledge was not put for good use! A raw transfer rate on a raid 0 may even be faster, but access times will still be atrocious.

| >>670152
ok so if you channel your dominant inner asperger's:
RAID 6: min 5 drives
RAID 0: min 2 dirves
and since you need 2x raid6 for raid 60
we get to do some fun multiplication
that's rigth 2 times 5 is 10

now the point i was actually making is that raid is in general a simple solution for small scale that's easy to implement
but for from effective so when working on a larger scale it's a shit pick

| OP here, I've got a feeling not a lot of you who commented acrually know what's a RAID array.
First, HDDs are way more reliable and certainly last longer than a SSD, that's not even up to debate, a SSD has finite number of rewrites, AND corrupt data over time.
A single SSD is faster, 2 HDDs in a RAID 0 is twice as fast as a single HDD, that's the point. If you're paranoid about losing your steam games just buy 2 more and set up a RAID 10. I've never had a HDD fail, ever.

| >>669919
And why are you even afraid of bumping your PC tower, to thw point of even mentioning it? Do you hump your computer or something?

| >raid 0
>in 2020
Go ssd, don't feel bad for your money, consider it as a long term investment (because it is). You'll thank me 3 years later. HDD is LITERALLY obsolete technology.

| >>670613
Wait, op wasn't even asking for advice, just read the op post.
I highly doubt raid 0 7200 hdds are faster than a m.2 ssd. Even if they were, the disadvantages easily outweigh the advantages, maybe except cost. My point still stands, just buy an ssd and be done with it.

| I knew solid state drives had amassed a cult following but I wasn't expecting such a fierce response, do you know what's a SSD? If you formatted yours in NTFS I pity you. It's just flash drive, that's all it is, an overpriced thumb drive.

| >>670604
>First, HDDs are way more reliable and certainly last longer than a SSD, that's not even up to debate, a SSD has finite number of rewrites, AND corrupt data over time.
Wrong, wrong and wrong
>set up a RAID 10
I thought we were talking about raid 0
>I've never had a HDD fail, ever.
Thanks for the anecdotal evidence, unfortunately not very helpful.

| >>670615
>overpriced thumb drive.
Except thumb drives cost more per gb and have lower speeds, obviously. Get an ssd and be done with it unless you're an enterprise user which I doubt would be lurking here.

| Why is a thunb drive slower I wonder? Just plug it on your motherboard instead of a USB port and it's exactly the same. You're trying to find a way to be validated for spending so much money on internal thumb drives, that's all it is

| >>670619
Because the cooling's significantly worse, dummy.

| What?? LOL
You're all just coping, that's all it is, it's fun really, have fun smashing HDDs with sledgehammers once you're done crying.
You're running your computers on thumb drives like console peasants and I'm the gigachad alpha predator using RAID, cope harder.

| Lmao imagine being ignorant, using obsolete technology AND being proud of it. Stay poor

| Imagine coping that hard

| >buzzwords buzzwords buzzwords buzzwords
Not going to argue with an underage.

| >>670619
thumb drives literally don't have dram you absolute tech-let

| "Stop using obsolete technology I'm running Linux on my flaccid thumb drive and I got no response delay!"
If that's the best you can bring to the table then OPs out. Do your research, look into RAID 0, 1, 10, and 5, and ASCEND.

| Gosh this place turned into the dumpster that 4chan /tech/ is

| and what if i bring a RAID 51 (parity + replication) to the area 51 raid?

| >>670722
Hot damn g/u/rl

| >>670604
>feeling not a lot...
yes and that feeling is what makes you a moron
that just discovered raid and thinks their hot shit
>longer than a SSD
Avrage hdd life expectency is 4 years while a new pcie ssd is expected to be over 2 lifetimes if you're rewriting data 24/7

looking at the reast of the post i see you have ware unable/unwilling to comprehend the text above

look up bitrot it's decades older then flash memory making you're claims of data preservation utter bollocks

| >>670605
transport, maintnance, cases without padded drive bays, eathquakes, cases on tables, bumping the case.
in conclusion my dear OP motion exists and it will inevitably happen to most ppls hdds

| >>670627
Linux was never mentioned
it was said that ntfs is hot garbade which it is

and calling an SSD a "thumb drive" is like calling
an HDD a "wire recording"

-> autistic & wrong

| >>670882
Actually looked it up aparently hdd faliure rate is actually ~15% at y4 which makes me unlucky i guess
still comparing it to something like 9PBW of a pcie ssd it's simply cant compare that kind of ssd will outlive you

Total number of posts: 31, last modified on: Fri Jan 1 00:00:00 1592519694

This thread is closed.