2 Sata drives in Raid array vs a 10k Raptor

[theofile]

Which setup is faster and by how much? The 2 Sata drives would be 7200s.
The raptor - 74gb.

[bitTRL1000]

I'd really like to know this one as well

[nicolaus corelius]

they say the raid is still faster
as a matter of fact its more wise to spend a little on HDD then shell out enormious amounts of cash for 0.1GHZ gains.

[shadowbreaker513]

10k by far. RAID0 offers little to no performance gains in real life, and can actually slow game loading times in some situations.

[ZeratulsAvenger]

Raid 0 is rarely advised around these boards, least I don't remember a time when it was. The 10k drives I have heard are blazing fast, I would go with the 10k.

[spyder003]

Get the Raptor. The only real application for RAID 0 might be for audio/video editing, working with extra large files.

[foghat46]

As you can see from the sig, my two mains are both Raid 0 7200rpm setups. Although they are fast in comparison to my other "normal drive" PCs, the Raptor still is faster.

[GRP]

I think RAID 0 is pretty popular these days, it may not be all it's cracked up to be but if set up right, 2 hard drives working in tandem has to have some speed advantage. So I'm saying if your going raid 0 than you go with 2 raptors. The Whole idea is to be faster so, two raptors is faster than one raptor, two 7200 rpm plain vanillas are faster than one. If you really want to kick butt, you can always get a 320 MPS 64 bit SCSI Ultra320 card and a pair of 15000 rpm Ultra320 SCSI Cheetahs HD's, set em in a Raid 0. Now, the Raptors are "mamma's boys".

[carlmccut]

Another thing to think about with raid 0 arrays is that you increase your risks. If one drive fails you are out of luck.