Solid State Drive PC

He could pick up a single SSD drive and get two 1TB WD Black drives in RAID 0 for storage.
 
I would not raid 0 my storage.

Its storage caues its big cheap and you only access it when you need something on there, therefore speed is not number 1 priority. Its not like a good normal SATA drive is slow either.
 
He could pick up a single SSD drive and get two 1TB WD Black drives in RAID 0 for storage.

RAID0 for storage is bad. If anything you want RAID1, but that's beside the point. If I were your friend I would just get 1 120GB or so SSD. If he decides he needs more speed, he can add a second one.
 
I'll send him that article, and I'll also suggest the one SSD. But then my question still remains unanswered (unless I missed it...)

The video with the 25 SSDs... the SPEED of that computer is basically what my friend wants. So in reality, are you all saying that having a single SSD would be comparable to all 25 of those SSDs in RAID in that video?
 
We're saying that he's not going to do what they did in that video (open up all MS Office applications at once, etc). One SDD will be insanely fast. If he decides he needs more speed, he can add another and RAID0. He shouldn't need anything more.
 
We're saying that he's not going to do what they did in that video (open up all MS Office applications at once, etc). One SDD will be insanely fast. If he decides he needs more speed, he can add another and RAID0. He shouldn't need anything more.

Understandable, but he WANTS comparable speed. We can sit here all day and argue about whether or not he'll ever "need" to open up all MS Office apps and a bunch of other stuff at the same time, but all I am asking about is the speed and how comparable it would be to the video.
 
Humm...it's hard to compare a 2-drive RAID0 with a 24-drive RAID0. I would assume the speed gains are not 100% for every drive and fall off with the more drives you add.

This thread my shed some light: http://www.overclock.net/hard-drives-storage/324322-2-drive-raid-0-vs-3-a.html

If you look at the bottom it compares a 4-Raptors RAID0 with a 6-Raptors RAID0, and the difference is not that much. I think you'd have noticeable difference up to 3-4 drives, then the difference between 4 and 24 would be very low.
 
that video was nothing but an example of.

I've got an unlimited budget and im going to spend stupid amounts of money. Totally unpractical and something you could never live with, did you notice he couldn't even put the drives anywhere but laying all over the table with an EXTRA power supply to push it all.
Its just silly.

those drives are 642 per drive, they spent 15,408 on drives alone... again its just silly.

like joga is saying 4 in RAID0 is probably the farthest a rational person would take it, any more and you are just pissing away cash for no good reason. go pick up ONE and check out the speed, if its not good enough go pickup 3 more and RAID0 them.
 
Understandable, but he WANTS comparable speed. We can sit here all day and argue about whether or not he'll ever "need" to open up all MS Office apps and a bunch of other stuff at the same time, but all I am asking about is the speed and how comparable it would be to the video.


Just slap him upside the head and tell him if he wants comparable speed he'll have to spend $15,000 dollars on the set-up.

If you slap him hard enough, should be easier to convince him that he just need 1 SSD drive.
 
Understandable, but he WANTS comparable speed.
I want my 20 year old mini to go at roughly the same speed as a Veyron and I've got £50 to spend, any suggestions?

What you're asking is completely impractical on many levels, to get similar speed to the setup in the video you'll need to spend similar money and live with similar impracticalities that aren't covered there (like the horrendous reliability.) The only way that will change is when SSDs become cheaper and faster, in which case you can spend a bit less to get a similar result.

End of.
 
Back
Top Bottom