|
|
| Author |
Message |
kireol
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 9517
Location: Royal Oak, MI
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Mugaaz
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3576
|
 Posted: 04/11/06 - 09:05 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Is it true giant HDD's suck for gaming and having your OS on due to load time or what have you?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
kireol
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 9517
Location: Royal Oak, MI
|
|
Posted: 04/11/06 - 09:28 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
well, i dont think that what you said is true, but the reverse of that can mean faster load times. 2 150GBs with proper RAID setup can well out perform 1 300GB. that doesnt mean that that 300GB is slower than 1 150GB.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
goatface
Sir Postalot
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 1354
|
|
Posted: 04/11/06 - 10:12 Post subject:
|
|
|
>1 Year Limited Manufacturer Warranty
that sorta sucks
eventho i still have 7+ year old Maxtor still running
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
motherface
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 3407
|
|
Posted: 04/11/06 - 10:34 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Big drive = more spindles
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
sinrakin
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 7044
|
|
Posted: 04/11/06 - 11:07 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
I have to say I never noticed a huge improvement in games from raid-0. I got great scores on disk benchmarks, but those are mostly sequential reads of large amounts of data. Things like zoning or loading textures never seemed to improve very much. I think maybe the games aren't coded to take advantage of it, and do lots of small reads all over the disk so you don't see much advantage from the transfer rate. Defragmenting never made a difference, so I think it's just how the data is stored.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Jukas
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 19 Mar 2003
Posts: 896
|
|
Posted: 04/11/06 - 11:13 Post subject:
|
|
|
| goatface wrote: | >1 Year Limited Manufacturer Warranty
that sorta sucks
eventho i still have 7+ year old Maxtor still running |
The new craptacular 1yr warranty Maxtors seem to fail a shitton more too.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
atarom
Dalai Lama of RealPoor
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 16395
Location: 375th st. Y
|
|
Posted: 04/11/06 - 15:06 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
hm this would put me over 1TB
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Kenbin
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 15 Nov 2002
Posts: 1884
Location: New York City
|
|
Posted: 04/12/06 - 00:02 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
this would put me at 550 GB!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Kenelm
Rookie
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 56
|
|
Posted: 04/12/06 - 11:00 Post subject:
|
|
|
| kireol wrote: | | well, i dont think that what you said is true, but the reverse of that can mean faster load times. 2 150GBs with proper RAID setup can well out perform 1 300GB. that doesnt mean that that 300GB is slower than 1 150GB. |
Raid 0 FTW!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Regan
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 751
Location: Miami
|
|
Posted: 04/12/06 - 17:28 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Kenelm wrote: | | kireol wrote: | | well, i dont think that what you said is true, but the reverse of that can mean faster load times. 2 150GBs with proper RAID setup can well out perform 1 300GB. that doesnt mean that that 300GB is slower than 1 150GB. |
Raid 0 FTW! |
2 300gb in raid 0 > 2 150s!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
