TilDeath Experience

[Silat]

Long ago in a galaxy far far away, Dells by the dozen were used and abused. Then the evil empire purchased my company and I retired.

With some guidance from a friend I learned to build my own gaming boxes. I have built a few and its extremely easy and satisfying but this time around I got lazy and decided to see how much it would cost to have someone else build me a gaming computer.

I contacted a few people and ended up going with Rich/Tildeath. I told Rich what I wanted and he interrogated me so that he could assess my true desires and needs.

His style impressed me. The mink lined handcuffs and riding crop were oh so hot.  He asked me if I was looking to overclock the machine on my own. I couldn't answer with the ball in my mouth, so he removed it and applied a little of the riding crop. After a little prodding I answered, "no mistress TilDeath". So he matched me up with the EVGA X58 instead of the ASUS board.

We talked about my backup habits ( he liked the "Nuns of Bondage and Pain" habit best ).

Then he helped me decide on the "hard" drives. It seemed like hours.

After we finalized my parts list he went to work. After a few hours under his thumb I was spent. I caved in and agreed to buy a computer from him.

He put me away wet.

I wasn't in a hurry and didn't harass Rich to see where my computer was ( I hadn't healed from the riding crop yet ). But he did call me regularly to tell me what was going on during the building process.

Anyway the computer did arrive a few weeks after I ordered it. It was packed perfectly and arrived with no damage from shipping.

When I opened the box I found that the power cable had been forgotten. Rich was in touch with me minutes after I opened the box so it was taken care of immediately. I got another cable at my local computer repair shop and Rich paid for it. He still hasn't stopped apologizing for this error.

Power on. Yeah it works He had managed the cables so that the inside of the case looked great. Also he had done some extra sleeving as it made my 4 hard drive setup much cleaner looking.

I have had a few very minor issues that Rich has helped me work through over the phone. These really aren't worth mentioning. But the fact that he is there for his customer after the sale, means a lot to me.

His attention to his customers is outstanding.

The follow-up service is excellent.

So for a few sheckles (and some bondage games ) more than I would have paid for parts from Newegg, Rich built me a superb computer that is tweaked for great performance.

My parts list:

Motherboard - EVGA X58

CPU - I7 920

Heatsink/Fan - OCZ Vendetta 2

Memory - OCZ DDR3 PC3-14400 Reaper 6gb

Video Card - GTX 280

Power Supply - OCZ Elite Extreme 1000 watt

Hard Drives - 2 @ WD640GB in raid 0

Hard Drives (Backups) - 2 @ WD 1Terrabyte

CD/DVD - 2 ASUS Combo Drives 20x

OS - Vista 64 ( yes its awesome )

 

[Masherbrum]

Rich is a class act.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I'm sure the computer flies now but I learned the hard way to stay away from Raid0.

Either HD dies and your stuff is permanently gone. A single HD failure can happen in 2 days with a new hd if you're unlucky like I was. It was 9 years ago and I lost 80gb of data with my very first Raid 0 experiment naturally no backup as I learned the hard way. 80gb was a lot 9 years ago.

Even if you're going to back up everything you do unless you have some exotic on-the-run imaging system going you're still going to lose a days worth of data.
If you don't have an automated backup it means there will always be stuff not on backup etc..

Raid10 would be the way I would go. It's not as fast as 0 but it's close and a single HD can pop without causing a problem. In fact in gaming use the benefits from raid 0 are relatively so small that I justify raid to myself only by data protection.

[Silat]

I'm sure the computer flies now but I learned the hard way to stay away from Raid0.

Either HD dies and your stuff is permanently gone. A single HD failure can happen in 2 days with a new hd if you're unlucky like I was. It was 9 years ago and I lost 80gb of data with my very first Raid 0 experiment naturally no backup as I learned the hard way. 80gb was a lot 9 years ago.

Even if you're going to back up everything you do unless you have some exotic on-the-run imaging system going you're still going to lose a days worth of data.
If you don't have an automated backup it means there will always be stuff not on backup etc..

Raid10 would be the way I would go. It's not as fast as 0 but it's close and a single HD can pop without causing a problem. In fact in gaming use the benefits from raid 0 are relatively so small that I justify raid to myself only by data protection.

Yes I have an exotic background imaging system with rollback capabilities:) Both drives can die and Im still ok as soon as I install new ones.
I use ShadowProtect and a program now unavailable in its full state called FDIsr...

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Yes I have an exotic background imaging system with rollback capabilities:) Both drives can die and Im still ok as soon as I install new ones.
I use ShadowProtect and a program now unavailable in its full state called FDIsr...

Ok so you're good as far as data goes. But you're still over twice as likely to have a system malfunction that will render your computer inoperable with Raid0. Malfunctions usually happen at the worst times, I suppose you have an identical backup harddrive in a sealed package waiting on the side also?

I'd feel like sitting under an axe ready to fall where with Raid10 I'm feeling quite the opposite and still have improved read speeds.

[Max]

Silat, does this mean you'll be back soon? Only reason I ask, Dlamb's been inquiring as to your whereabouts. He's grown up some, too. 

[Fulmar]

My current (and 1st) RAID 0 setup has been solid for the last two years.  I understand the risks and I enjoy the performance gains I get when work with large video files or something similar.

Currently, I do not do daily work on my machine.  It's much more of a gaming rig than my all-in-one computer.  My important stuff is backed up on a 2nd internal drive for temporary storage.  Critical stuff is made on multiple DVD copies, my internet file server, and my local file server.  You can't just have one copy lying around.  Even if I was running a RAID 1 or 5 setup, I'd probably practice the same measures.  Granted they greatly increase your protection from losing the data, it's never stopped acts of God.  A good old electrical storm or flood trumps your RAID array any day.

Forgot to knock of wood.

[llama]

For what it's worth, I never EVER set up a clients' machine with RAID0. In my experience, the risk of catastrophic data loss after a drive failure is too great compared to the very minor increase in real-world speed.

How minor is the increase of real world speed? I take my examples from Anandtech (which jives with my stopwatch timings I made two years ago for an article I wound up not writing):

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2969&p=8

Their summary:

If it is not obvious by now, RAID 0 will provide outstanding results in synthetic benchmarks but really does nothing in actual applications. We should probably clarify that statement in detail. Utilizing the best performing drives in RAID 0 is the setup to have if you are looking to publish top benchmark scores with results in PCMark05 improving by 25% as an example. That same setup will provide you with at best minimal performance improvements in most applications, or sometimes no difference at all.

I have what are by most accounts a very robust backup system: in my current testing of AV software, where I let viruses run wild and see how different AV products deal with them and clean things, and then restore things back to pre-test conditions, I don't need to alter my typical backup procedures at all. And with this said, even I would never consider a RAID0 setup, let alone recommend it to someone with a less comprehensive backup plan.

Be warned, my friend.

-Llama

[Silat]

Silat, does this mean you'll be back soon? Only reason I ask, Dlamb's been inquiring as to your whereabouts. He's grown up some, too. 

You cant fool me Maxine.. That is an old pic of his mother......

[Silat]

Ok so you're good as far as data goes. But you're still over twice as likely to have a system malfunction that will render your computer inoperable with Raid0. Malfunctions usually happen at the worst times, I suppose you have an identical backup harddrive in a sealed package waiting on the side also?

I'd feel like sitting under an axe ready to fall where with Raid10 I'm feeling quite the opposite and still have improved read speeds.

LOL Rip. Talk about a negative nanny. The odds are no worse than having 1 drive go bad. If a drive goes bad then Ill replace it. Load up my image and keep on going. And Im good as far as my image goes. My image can go back on any HD I get. It doesnt have to be the same as the dead one. I dont really understand your issue..

[TequilaChaser]

LOL Rip. Talk about a negative nanny. The odds are no worse than having 1 drive go bad. If a drive goes bad then Ill replace it. Load up my image and keep on going. And Im good as far as my image goes. My image can go back on any HD I get. It doesnt have to be the same as the dead one. I dont really understand your issue..

Silat, of course you know this..but if you do have to replace a bad HD that is in a RAID 0 setup......you got to completely start over with both the good remaining HD and the new HD....meaning you got to reformat both HD's and then reload your image backup ...as for being identical you only need your new replacement HD to be of at least same size capacity ( or can be larger ) and you most definitely want the new HD to have same RPM & cache specs as the remaining good HD.......is why I prefer to stay with minimal of RAID 1, when using a RAID array......utilizing HD's that have hot swappable capibility......

I think this is what MrRip was getting at anyhows.......

congrats on the new Comp.....sounds like ole TilDeath puts Customer Service & satisfaction, up there in the Number 1 slot as it should be...... from all the post I have seen his cliental post here......... thats TOP NOTCH, WTG TilDeath

[MrRiplEy[H]]

LOL Rip. Talk about a negative nanny. The odds are no worse than having 1 drive go bad. If a drive goes bad then Ill replace it. Load up my image and keep on going. And Im good as far as my image goes. My image can go back on any HD I get. It doesnt have to be the same as the dead one. I dont really understand your issue..

No Silat your odds are double or more to have a failure. First of all you have two different pieces of hardware working synchronously. This doubles your odds for having a monday sample on either one. Second the synchronous operation is very demanding and you should have exactly identical drives.

People who work with large videofiles should get 15k rpm SAS arrays with 4-8 hdd's running Raid10 with BBCW for real speed gains. Costs a few hundred bucks more but then it's pro stuff already.

[Silat]

No Silat your odds are double or more to have a failure. First of all you have two different pieces of hardware working synchronously. This doubles your odds for having a monday sample on either one. Second the synchronous operation is very demanding and you should have exactly identical drives.

People who work with large videofiles should get 15k rpm SAS arrays with 4-8 hdd's running Raid10 with BBCW for real speed gains. Costs a few hundred bucks more but then it's pro stuff already.

I have incremental backups also.. Every 15 minutes.. So lets say I get corrupted,broken,run thru the washer and dryer. Big deal. I do what I need to do hardware wise. Then I format and put on my image. Then I tell shadow protect to load the image from before the problem. Im done. Up and running. I really dont see the issue.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I have incremental backups also.. Every 15 minutes.. So lets say I get corrupted,broken,run thru the washer and dryer. Big deal. I do what I need to do hardware wise. Then I format and put on my image. Then I tell shadow protect to load the image from before the problem. Im done. Up and running. I really dont see the issue.

The issue is that a single hd failure can render your computer unbootable + you're not getting that much benefit. With SAS disks in Raid10 you'd see a sizeable improvement in speed + a single disk could not render your system inoperable. All those incremental backups are with 100% certainty also bringing constant load on your system that wouldn't be there.

Backup means disk i/o reads, network saturation, cpu utilization - all this in the background when you're supposed to work and enjoy the already marginal benefit from raid0. Opposite where independent raid card running SAS disks offloads strain from the rest of the system for real world benefits.

It's your privilege to run your system just as you wish, this is just my aspect to it.

[Silat]

The issue is that a single hd failure can render your computer unbootable + you're not getting that much benefit. With SAS disks in Raid10 you'd see a sizeable improvement in speed + a single disk could not render your system inoperable. All those incremental backups are with 100% certainty also bringing constant load on your system that wouldn't be there.

Backup means disk i/o reads, network saturation, cpu utilization - all this in the background when you're supposed to work and enjoy the already marginal benefit from raid0. Opposite where independent raid card running SAS disks offloads strain from the rest of the system for real world benefits.

It's your privilege to run your system just as you wish, this is just my aspect to it.

Rip if I have one disk only then I am at the same risk. The incrementals dont even show a ripple while Im using them. There is no, nada effect that I can tell during normal usage.They are saved to a disk outside of the array. I do turn them off when going in game of course.
Now Rip if I lose a disk. I can take it out. Image to my 1 good disk if I cant wait to buy a new one. Im up running in about 20 minutes.I would only lose about 15 minutes of history.
I dont see how that is any different if I have say just one disk .. Im not really ready to add disks just to run raid 10. And I dont see any definitive info that says that 10 is that much if at all faster than 0. In fact I believe 10 using parity and striping. And with striping you stand the chance of something being corrupted. So there are drawbacks either way. 
Now one more time I say: I believe there is a bit of improvement using raid 0. And you can get varying opinions. SAS disks are far from ready for primetime game playing. And they may never be. It remains to be seen. I wouldnt touch SAS with a 10 foot pole till they have been in desktops for a year.