RAID limitation on K7T266Pro2-RU

Note: I am an experienced tech and the BIOS and all drivers are up to date.
I recently installed WinXP Pro on this board and used a 40gig-7200rpm IBM drive using the onboard Promise PDC20265 controller as a master, single drive striped array. You can have single drive 'fake' striped arrays on this ide controller and save the regular ide for other drives and also get some performance benefits by using separate channels.
The system is rock hard stable. By the way...if you want to ensure stability with the 'optimized settings' in the BIOS, I highly recommend using DDR with CL2. I've never seen a mobo as picky as this one when making tweaks to the BIOS settings!
I then attempted installing a second IBM drive (60gig 7200rpm) on the second Promise channel, and it properly configured a second 'fake' striped array and on we went to boot into WinXP. As soon as we hit the desktop though, the system just freezes up. I tried another exact same model drive, and even switched 80pin ide cables, all with the same result.
The MSI product description does state 'Note: only two hard disk drives will adopt RAID function', but I'm not sure exactly what THEY mean by that. I only have 2 drives total connected, but are they referring to only one raid set with up to 2 drives, or up to two raid sets with maximum of 2 drives, like my two 'fake' striped arrays?
If anyone else has any comments, including any MSI technicians, I'd appreciate them.
Thanks. 8)

Thanks for the very quick reply, but the link to the hacked bios won't let me into the ftp site. Even so, I'm a bit hesitant to apply any flash BIOS other than the most recent official release from MSI. My board is an RU and the link refers to just the R version. My board has the USB 2.0 onboard, and I'd hate to screw the board up. ;(

Similar Messages

CPU limits on K7T266Pro2?

I currently have a K7T266Pro2 with an Athlon XP1700+ cpu, and would like to get one last upgrade before replacing the mobo. I should be able to grab an XP2400+ for about 60 bucks and use it in this mobo, correct?

https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?threadid=23762&sid=

Xserver RAID options

I just purchased an Intel xserve with three 750 GB drives, and see there was no hardware RAID option. I would be OK with just mirroring 2 of the 750s, and keeping the 3rd as a spare, but during setup, it just assumed I wanted to install the OS on one drive, without a mirror.
OK fine. I then went into disk utility, and figured I could just add a second drive as a mirror. I have set up software mirrors on Windows servers, and the is an option to "add this volume as a mirror". Is there a way to do this?
Also, I would like to know how you have all set up your servers. Have you just used a single drive for your OS? I am just not comfortable doing this. If, not, what have you done?
TIA for any suggestions!
Enio

I am a new Xserve user and I am of the opinion that Apple could do more to explain:
1 - the RAID limitations of Xserve and
2 - the limitations of the 'free' 90 day support.
In both cases it is either difficult or impossible to obtain this information prior to purchase!
An Apple support person agreed with me that they could do more to assist those who want to use the OS X soft RAID rather than let them discover after a few hours playing that they should have ignored the instructions supplied and formatted two disks as RAID 1 and then installed everything afresh from the CD.
I decided to spend a little longer and reformat with Disk Utility and got RAID 1 working although there are a few holes in the instructions - ie which of the various icons should one click on!
Others may wish to see the following technical reply from Apple:
"I cannot give you any information if there will be a hardware raid option in the future. However I found a method to create a mirror without destroying the contents of the source disk. It requires the command-line however. You can use the command diskutil with the option enable raid. http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man8/diskutil .8.html A step by step guide can be found here: http://www.afp548.com/article.php?story=20040827122302975 Your support contract does not cover command-line assistance but you could purchase a support agreement for £455."
Xserve Mac OS X (10.4.9)

MSI K7T266Pro2 ver. 2.0 and Athlon XP 1700+ 0.13u

HI All
I own a mainboard MSI K7T266PRO2 Ver. 2.0
I was usign it with Duron 600@800, everythnig was great, but I decided to buy new proc. Athlon XP 1700+ in 0.13 technology. (I thought that after bios flashing it will work , but id doesn't The processor is exactly Athlon XP 1700+ JIHUB 0308XPMW.
Please help me somehow, I really do want to use my new proc. :-) I flashed the bios with the following versions of bioses from Kunibert:
BIOS-K7T266pro2-v35-NO-raid.zip
BIOS-K7T266pro2-v36-Full-raid.zip
BIOS-K7T266pro2-v37-Full-raid.zip
K7T266pro2 mod XP2200+.exe
In his article he wrote that is sould work, I don't know maybe I'm doing something wrong, or I have to do something more to make it work, I read about removing capacitor but I thought that it's neede only for XP 2200+, right?
Could anybody help me? Is there anybody who had the same problem I solved it somehow?
One more time, please help me :-)

Well, I couldn't remember, that I wrote an article about throughbred core athlons on the k7t266pro2.
Biosdevelopment has been discontinued since version 3.6 by massive flamming and discredit and therefore no further versions will be available for any board.

Boot with software RAID0

Hi Everybody,
is it possible to boot my Mac Pro with two SSDs that are in a software RAID 0 array?
The specs of the SSDs are: write 285MB/s, read 275MB/s. Would there be any increase in speed, or is the software RAID limited to some amount?
cheers, Mike

Your Mac Pro uses a chipset that is limited to 1GB/sec and even one 3Gbps interface (300MB) can only use about 250MB/sec
But... yes it works and you should see an improvement.
Some people put SSDs in optical drive bay (lower) so that they can use the other bays.
http://macperformanceguide.com/SSD-RealWorld-SevereDuty.html

K7T Turbo-R Limited Edition W/Raid

Two questions,
first how do you tell if your XP 1800+ is a palomino? I purchased one but all it says is AMD Athlon XP 1800+ on the factory sticker.
Second when I use this processor with my K7T Turbo-R Limited W/Raid it will boot up fine, displays the correct processor speed (shows XP 1800+ in post) but the pc will at random times out of the blue just re-boot. I have a 400 watt psu AMD approved. and my memory is good. I've done all the bios updates also. Is it possible that this is an unsupported cpu?

http://www.amdboard.com/amdid.html
http://www.overclockers.com/tips00173/

K7T Turbo Limited Edition W/Raid board

Can someone tell me if the VIA KT133A Chipset Based K7T Turbo Limited Edition W/ Raid board will take a faster processor beyond 1.6 ghz? if so what is the fastest cpu it will take?

Athlon xp 1800 thoroughbred works on my k7 turbo r le,
Thanks to everyone here, I read a gazzilion messages before i was brave enough to start and it paid off.
Fitted board (£29 from stal.com) fitted duron, downloaded bios 3.6 and installed. set core voltage in bios to 1.55 and multiplier to 11.5x .Fit xp1800 - Boot and then go back into bios to set processor at 1.5v(Note: 1.5v not available until first boot with xp 1800)
Now going to try the fuzzy logic thingy.
Good luck.

K7T Turbo Limited Edition + Raid

Im Planning to upgrade to a K7T Turbo Limited Edition + Raid (MS-6330 3.0) with an XP 2000.... are there any issues with the board with this CPU? According to the bios updates theysupport up to XP2600+'s... im not going ddr yet, prices are WAY to high.
Just need somethin a bit faster than this Duron 900

LOL
Ok... check here:
link
only one K7T Turbo2 : link
And here : link
there have a lot of MS-6330's, don't buy any of them as those are obsolete model. Go for K7T Turbo2.

RAID Card - Current firmware limiting capacity?

We have tried using 1.5TB drives with the Mac Pro RAID card and had some serious reliability issues from the outset.
We're wondering if the firmware simply hasn't been designed to support capacities over the 1TB that Apple sells. Both Hitachi and Seagate currently limit their Enterprise class 7200rpm SATA drives to 1TB. Apple uses the Hitachi Ultrastar drives as far as I've seen so far.
I'd like to know from a good source (if not Apple) whether or not the firmware is to blame because 1.5TB Enterprise-class drives don't yet exist.

Same here....WD 1.5 TB drives..Created a single 3.7TB RAID5 set with a single volume. Appeared to be just fine...few days later drops a drive. Set the drive as a spare, it rebuilds. Corruption all over the place. Then it says the raid5 volume is unrecognized and goes into safe mode (ie. Read only). Funny thing is all the apple people (enterprise support, local stores, etc...) all said 1.5TB drives should work....ordering 1TB Hitachi's.
Come on apple...for a $700 raid card you can do better. I believe it is an Areca card (ARC-1212 maybe???)
Running it on a 8-core 2.8 w/ 10GB RAM, everything up to date...Raid card says:
Hardware Version 1.00
Firmware Version M-2.0.3.3
Expansion ROM 0018
Battery on Raid is fine and fully charged:
Firmware: 1.0d19

SSD/RAID set up - limited budget.

I'm building a PC with the following specs for 1080p/2k editing on PPro and AE CC:
CPU: Intel Core i7-5820K 3.3GHz
Memory: G.Skill Sniper Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1866 Memory
Storage 01: Crucial M550 256GB SSD
Storage 02: Crucial M550 256GB SSD
Storage 03: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 7200RPM HDD
Video Card: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 760 (4GB VRAM)
I intend to do a striped RAID setup (RAID0) on the two SSDs.
Would it be worthwhile getting a third SSD exclusively for the OS (Windows 8.1) and running a software RAID on the two other SSDs?
Is firmware RAID an option for this configuration and if so is it in any way advantageous over the software RAID setup?
Thanks in advance.

By 'hardware RAID,' do you mean a motherboard chip, or a dedicated PCI-E card?
Is there an affordable means to the latter?

K7T266pro2-RU raid and XP service pack 2

After installing windows xp sp2 on this board, pci devices disappear from device manager and connections folder.
Specifically an intel 536 pci modem and a SMC(realtek 8139) pci ethernet card.
Dial up connections report the modem as unavailable device missing, and won't work.
The lan works but you can't get to the card thru connections folder, so you can't easily adjust properties.
However system information sees and prints reports on both devices.
NEC usb to pci open host controllers also vanish, but all the 8 of the usb slots still work.
I deleted the partition and re-installed xp, and the devices were all installed ok and appeared in device manager and connections. After sp2 was installed they were gone.
Previously this board and pci devices had worked ok with sp1.
I tried installing the pci modem after sp2 was installed and with difficulty this was done thru add hardware. However still not present in device manager or connections.
Latest bios 3.7 is on the board.
I have a msi-6712 board with sp2 installed and this is ok. I took the modem from the KT7 266 and installed it in this ok. Works fine.

Thank you! Yes, I've seen lots about SP2 not handling hardware.

RAID BIOS sees HDD but XP does not

I have a K7T266Pro2-RU (MSI 6380) mobo with an 80 GB Maxtor HDD on IDE3 and a 250 GB WD on IDE4, using the latest FastTrak100 RAID drivers from the promise website. On IDE 1 and 2 I have 3 optical drives installed.
The problem is that while the RAID bios detects the HDD's just fine (as two separate Stripe 1+0 arrays) and boots fine off IDE3, XP does not see the other array and therefore the larger HDD is invisible. Of course I have SP1 installed with the LBA support, and when I try the HDD on one of the primary IDE channels it is recognised just fine by XP.
So one might think that the problem lies with the RAID driver.....except to throw another spanner in the works, I did have this working fine on the RAID controller, until I decided to re-install XP from scratch on the smaller HDD (larger HDD is full of data). But for some reason this fresh install will not recognise the second HDD on the RAID controller... whats killing me is that it did work beforehand, and now it wont. I cant think what I have missed to make this work....
Any ideas appreciated please

You really had it working before? Weird - it's not supposed to work! The Promise controller supports either 0 or 1. I can't see how you got 0+1.
And how can the second (bigger) HDD be the "other array" if you've got mirroring in there somewhere? OK, you can maybe fool a single drive into thinking it's a striped array but no way a mirror is anything other than a second drive which is part of the SAME array as the first drive.
It looks like you have successfully created a mirrored array using the 2 drives (RAID 1). There's no way you have a striped array accross the 2 drives since they have to be the same size for that to work. Mirroring is OK with drives of different sizes. The trouble is, the extra space on the larger drive is just wasted - the total array space is limited to the size of the smaller drive.
Since the second drive is just a mirror and the extra space is always unusable, it's no surprise you can't see it in XP. You would never want to read or write specifically to the mirror.

Via 6420 Raid Chip

Trying to do some homework while anxiously awaiting the release of the 865PE-PFISR mobo. Fortunately MSI allow me to download the manual w/o having to first buy the board .
What attracts me to this mobo is the large number of IDE connectors, IDE1,2 and IDE3 for PATA units, SATA1,2 and SATA 3,4 for SATA units. Nice. Now we know we can only put one SATA unit on each SATA channel, that makes 4 SATA drives. But I can put 2 PATA units on each IDE channel, right ? SO that makes 6 PATA units, ie a total of 10 ATA units. Check me:
IDE1 Primary + Optional Slave, HDD or optical, max 2
IDE2 Primary + Optional Slave, HDD or optical, max 2
IDE3 Primary + Optional Slave, HDD only max 2
SATA1 HDD Only Max 1
SATA2 HDD Only Max 1
SATA3 HDD Only Max 1
SATA4 HDD Only Max 1
Ok so here's two questions, any bright ideas welcome to satisfy my stupidity appreciated please:
1) The BIOS in the Standard CMOS setup area (P 3-6) allows for the setup of FOUR IDE devices and their slaves, ie a total of 8 units. I know this does not include any possible RAID setup (separate). But what are these 4 channels physically referring to ? Would guess IDE1,2,3 and SATA 1 + 2 where SATA 2 is identified as a "slave" to SATA 1 ? That leaves SATA 3 and 4 for the RAID controller, but doesnt explain what controls IDE3...
2) Appendix C1 says this "1. Support two SATA + two PATA, 2. Only SATA supports RAID". Right, so if this is the case then I can only use SATA disks for RAID. Means I can use SATA 1,2 for one array (2HDD) and SATA 3,4 for another array (2 more HDD). So IDE3 I cannot use for RAID.
Right, so what controls IDE3, seems the RAID chip to me, but if this is the case how can the standard BIOS allow for the setp of 4 x channels each with master and slave capability ?
See my confusion ? I am used to the old Promise 100 on my K7T266Pro2-RU (direct control over IDE3 and 4 only) and I really want to know what channels this VIA 6420 chip actually controls, and what the standard non-RAID SATA/PATA controllers actually control....

Thats a Good question, and I will go to the Via site to find out, as you know right now all the Intel Based P-4 Mo-Bo's ICH5 support only 2 S-ATA Devices, and the rest are supported by the Third Party IDE Controler (Promise or Silicon Images, VIA) as you know that the Promise Controler that is on Both the i875 and i865 Supports 2 S-ATA HDD and 2 P-ATA HDD on IDE-3......Now my ABIT Supports 6 S-ATA altogether the intel ICH5 = 2 and the Silicon Images Supports 4 S-ATA (But the ABIT does not have the P-ATA IDE-3)...I was just reading the i865PE-PSIF2R Manual and this Via Chip is limited to 2 S-ATA and 2 P-ATA just like the Promise Chip that MSI used to use...I went to the VIA site and the 6420 Chip does NOT support more than 2+2, so it's not like MSI told them to hold Back...I also read at VIA's site that thier new Controler (due out in the Spring) will support 4+2 so yep I think that MSI Should stick with VIA for the Extra Onboard IDE Solutions, since they already sell the VIA Based Motherboard thats what they should do (Get rid of Promise)..And the Best thing that MSI Could do as far as VIA is Concerned, is to Get VIA to supply MSI (us) with those beautiful VIA Sound Chip Called the "Envy 24-PT" 24-Bit 7.1 onboard sound with 96KHz Digital Sampling that all those Lucky MSI PT880 Owners now have !! OK mabe thats asking for to much..I'll settle for the VIA-VT1617 Sound Chip, as this has 20 Bit 7.1 Sound too...Time to get rid of the "C-Media" sound.............Sean REILLY875

To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question

People often ask: Should I raid my disks?
The question is simple, unfortunately the answer is not. So here I'm going to give you another guide to help you decide when a raid array is advantageous and how to go about it. Notice that this guide also applies to SSD's, with the expection of the parts about mechanical failure.
What is a RAID?
RAID is the acronym for "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks". The concept originated at the University of Berkely in 1987 and was intended to create large storage capacity with smaller disks without the need for very expensive and reliable disks, that were very expensive at that time, often a tenfold of smaller disks. Today prices of hard disks have fallen so much that it often is more attractive to buy a single 1 TB disk than two 500 GB disks. That is the reason that today RAID is often described as "Redundant Array of Independent Disks".
The idea behind RAID is to have a number of disks co-operate in such a way that it looks like one big disk. Note that 'Spanning' is not in any way comparable to RAID, it is just a way, like inverse partitioning, to extend the base partition to use multiple disks, without changing the method of reading and writing to that extended partition.
Why use a RAID?
Now with these lower disks prices today, why would a video editor consider a raid array? There are two reasons:
1. Redundancy (or security)
2. Performance
Notice that it can be a combination of both reasons, it is not an 'either/or' reason.
Does a video editor need RAID?
No, if the above two reasons, redundancy and performance are not relevant. Yes if either or both reasons are relevant.
Re 1. Redundancy
Every mechanical disk will eventually fail, sometimes on the first day of use, sometimes only after several years of usage. When that happens, all data on that disk are lost and the only solution is to get a new disk and recreate the data from a backup (if you have one) or through tedious and time-consuming work. If that does not bother you and you can spare the time to recreate the data that were lost, then redundancy is not an issue for you. Keep in mind that disk failures often occur at inconvenient moments, on a weekend when the shops are closed and you can't get a replacement disk, or when you have a tight deadline.
Re 2. Performance
Opponents of RAID will often say that any modern disk is fast enough for video editing and they are right, but only to a certain extent. As fill rates of disks go up, performance goes down, sometimes by 50%. As the number of disk activities on the disk go up , like accessing (reading or writing) pagefile, media cache, previews, media, project file, output file, performance goes down the drain. The more tracks you have in your project, the more strain is put on your disk. 10 tracks require 10 times the bandwidth of a single track. The more applications you have open, the more your pagefile is used. This is especially apparent on systems with limited memory.
The following chart shows how fill rates on a single disk will impact performance:
Remember that I said previously the idea behind RAID is to have a number of disks co-operate in such a way that it looks like one big disk. That means a RAID will not fill up as fast as a single disk and not experience the same performance degradation.
RAID basics
Now that we have established the reasons why people may consider RAID, let's have a look at some of the basics.
Single or Multiple?
There are three methods to configure a RAID array: mirroring, striping and parity check. These are called levels and levels are subdivided in single or multiple levels, depending on the method used. A single level RAID0 is striping only and a multiple level RAID15 is a combination of mirroring (1) and parity check (5). Multiple levels are designated by combining two single levels, like a multiple RAID10, which is a combination of single level RAID0 with a single level RAID1.
Hardware or Software?
The difference is quite simple: hardware RAID controllers have their own processor and usually their own cache. Software RAID controllers use the CPU and the RAM on the motherboard. Hardware controllers are faster but also more expensive. For RAID levels without parity check like Raid0, Raid1 and Raid10 software controllers are quite good with a fast PC.
The common Promise and Highpoint cards are all software controllers that (mis)use the CPU and RAM memory. Real hardware RAID controllers all use their own IOP (I/O Processor) and cache (ever wondered why these hardware controllers are expensive?).
There are two kinds of software RAID's. One is controlled by the BIOS/drivers (like Promise/Highpoint) and the other is solely OS dependent. The first kind can be booted from, the second one can only be accessed after the OS has started. In performance terms they do not differ significantly.
For the technically inclined: Cluster size, Block size and Chunk size
In short: Cluster size applies to the partition and Block or Stripe size applies to the array.
With a cluster size of 4 KB, data are distributed across the partition in 4 KB parts. Suppose you have a 10 KB file, three full clusters will be occupied: 4 KB - 4 KB - 2 KB. The remaining 2 KB is called slackspace and can not be used by other files. With a block size (stripe) of 64 KB, data are distributed across the array disks in 64 KB parts. Suppose you have a 200 KB file, the first part of 64 KB is located on disk A, the second 64 KB is located on disk B, the third 64 KB is located on disk C and the remaining 8 KB on disk D. Here there is no slackspace, because the block size is subdivided into clusters. When working with audio/video material a large block size is faster than smaller block size. Working with smaller files a smaller block size is preferred.
Sometimes you have an option to set 'Chunk size', depending on the controller. It is the minimal size of a data request from the controller to a disk in the array and only useful when striping is used. Suppose you have a block size of 16 KB and you want to read a 1 MB file. The controller needs to read 64 times a block of 16 KB. With a chunk size of 32 KB the first two blocks will be read from the first disk, the next two blocks from the next disk, and so on. If the chunk size is 128 KB. the first 8 blocks will be read from the first disk, the next 8 block from the second disk, etcetera. Smaller chunks are advisable with smaller filer, larger chunks are better for larger (audio/video) files.
RAID Levels
For a full explanation of various RAID levels, look here: http://www.acnc.com/04_01_00/html
What are the benefits of each RAID level for video editing and what are the risks and benefits of each level to help you achieve better redundancy and/or better performance? I will try to summarize them below.
RAID0
The Band AID of RAID. There is no redundancy! There is a risk of losing all data that is a multiplier of the number of disks in the array. A 2 disk array carries twice the risk over a single disk, a X disk array carries X times the risk of losing it all.
A RAID0 is perfectly OK for data that you will not worry about if you lose them. Like pagefile, media cache, previews or rendered files. It may be a hassle if you have media files on it, because it requires recapturing, but not the end-of-the-world. It will be disastrous for project files.
Performance wise a RAID0 is almost X times as fast as a single disk, X being the number of disks in the array.
RAID1
The RAID level for the paranoid. It gives no performance gain whatsoever. It gives you redundancy, at the cost of a disk. If you are meticulous about backups and make them all the time, RAID1 may be a better solution, because you can never forget to make a backup, you can restore instantly. Remember backups require a disk as well. This RAID1 level can only be advised for the C drive IMO if you do not have any trust in the reliability of modern-day disks. It is of no use for video editing.
RAID3
The RAID level for video editors. There is redundancy! There is only a small performance hit when rebuilding an array after a disk failure due to the dedicated parity disk. There is quite a perfomance gain achieveable, but the drawback is that it requires a hardware controller from Areca. You could do worse, but apart from it being the Rolls-Royce amongst the hardware controllers, it is expensive like the car.
Performance wise it will achieve around 85% (X-1) on reads and 60% (X-1) on writes over a single disk with X being the number of disks in the array. So with a 6 disk array in RAID3, you get around 0.85x (6-1) = 425% the performance of a single disk on reads and 300% on writes.
RAID5 & RAID6
The RAID level for non-video applications with distributed parity. This makes for a somewhat severe hit in performance in case of a disk failure. The double parity in RAID6 makes it ideal for NAS applications.
The performance gain is slightly lower than with a RAID3. RAID6 requires a dedicated hardware controller, RAID5 can be run on a software controller but the CPU overhead negates to a large extent the performance gain.
RAID10
The RAID level for paranoids in a hurry. It delivers the same redundancy as RAID 1, but since it is a multilevel RAID, combined with a RAID0, delivers twice the performance of a single disk at four times the cost, apart from the controller. The main advantage is that you can have two disk failures at the same time without losing data, but what are the chances of that happening?
RAID30, 50 & 60
Just striped arrays of RAID 3, 5 or 6 which doubles the speed while keeping redundancy at the same level.
EXTRAS
RAID level 0 is striping, RAID level 1 is mirroring and RAID levels 3, 5 & 6 are parity check methods. For parity check methods, dedicated controllers offer the possibility of defining a hot-spare disk. A hot-spare disk is an extra disk that does not belong to the array, but is instantly available to take over from a failed disk in the array. Suppose you have a 6 disk RAID3 array with a single hot-spare disk and assume one disk fails. What happens? The data on the failed disk can be reconstructed in the background, while you keep working with negligeable impact on performance, to the hot-spare. In mere minutes your system is back at the performance level you were before the disk failure. Sometime later you take out the failed drive, replace it for a new drive and define that as the new hot-spare.
As stated earlier, dedicated hardware controllers use their own IOP and their own cache instead of using the memory on the mobo. The larger the cache on the controller, the better the performance, but the main benefits of cache memory are when handling random R+W activities. For sequential activities, like with video editing it does not pay to use more than 2 GB of cache maximum.
REDUNDANCY(or security)
Not using RAID entails the risk of a drive failing and losing all data. The same applies to using RAID0 (or better said AID0), only multiplied by the number of disks in the array.
RAID1 or 10 overcomes that risk by offering a mirror, an instant backup in case of failure at high cost.
RAID3, 5 or 6 offers protection for disk failure by reconstructing the lost data in the background (1 disk for RAID3 & 5, 2 disks for RAID6) while continuing your work. This is even enhanced by the use of hot-spares (a double assurance).
PERFORMANCE
RAID0 offers the best performance increase over a single disk, followed by RAID3, then RAID5 amd finally RAID6. RAID1 does not offer any performance increase.
Hardware RAID controllers offer the best performance and the best options (like adjustable block/stripe size and hot-spares), but they are costly.
SUMMARY
If you only have 3 or 4 disks in total, forget about RAID. Set them up as individual disks, or the better alternative, get more disks for better redundancy and better performance. What does it cost today to buy an extra disk when compared to the downtime you have when a single disk fails?
If you have room for at least 4 or more disks, apart from the OS disk, consider a RAID3 if you have an Areca controller, otherwise consider a RAID5.
If you have even more disks, consider a multilevel array by striping a parity check array to form a RAID30, 50 or 60.
If you can afford the investment get an Areca controller with battery backup module (BBM) and 2 GB of cache. Avoid as much as possible the use of software raids, especially under Windows if you can.
RAID, if properly configured will give you added redundancy (or security) to protect you from disk failure while you can continue working and will give you increased performance.
Look carefully at this chart to see what a properly configured RAID can do to performance and compare it to the earlier single disk chart to see the performance difference, while taking into consideration that you can have one disks (in each array) fail at the same time without data loss:
Hope this helps in deciding whether RAID is worthwhile for you.
WARNING: If you have a power outage without a UPS, all bets are off.
A power outage can destroy the contents of all your disks if you don't have a proper UPS. A BBM may not be sufficient to help in that case.

Harm,
thanks for your comment.
Your understanding was absolutely right.
Sorry my mistake its QNAP 639 PRO, populated with 5 1TB, one is empty.
So for my understanding, in my configuration you suggest NOT to use RAID-0. Im not willing to have more drives in my workstation becouse if my projekts are finished, i archiv on QNAP or archiv on other external drive.
My only intention is to have as much speed and as much performance as possible during developing a projekt
BTW QNAP i also use as media-center in combination with Sony PS3 to run the encoded files.
For my final understanding:
C: i understand
D: i understand
E and F: does it mean, when i create a projekt on E, all my captured and project-used MPEG - files should be situated in F? Or which media in F you mean?
Following your suggestions in want to rebulid Harms-Best Vista64-Benchmark comp to reach maximum speed and performance. Can i use in general the those hardware components (exept so many HD drives and exept Areca raid controller ) in my drive configuration C to F. Or would you suggest some changings in my situation?

Cannot install Windows XP on MS-6330 w/RAID

Hardware:
MSI-6330 K7T Turbo Limited Edition w/RAID (latest BIOS - 3.6)
256MB Kingston (2 sticks of 133mhz 128mb, the recommended memory)
AMD Athlon XP 1800
Hercules 3D Prophet 4000XT (kyro chipset)
3COM 3C905B NIC
Standard CDROM and Floppy
x2 Maxtor 30gb Diamondmax Plus 8 HDD's
Before I begin, all parts (CPU, mem, etc.) is tested good in another system. Tested in system with a MSI-6330 K7T Turbo 2, tests pass, and XP installs without ANY hitch. I have also been a PC tech by trade for the last 8 years, not tooting my own horn, just letting you know I have tried everything I know. I have also tried searching the net, and this forum, and have'nt been able to come up with anything concrete.
So, Windows XP Pro will not install for anything. I have set the array, deleted array, tried drives on just the standard IDE channel. Tried just one HDD on array, then standard. Booted with fail-safe BIOS settings, etc etc. Tried everything.
Windows starts the install, feed it the drivers from MSI's site for the RAID (PDC20265R). From there, I get a variety of errors. Sometimes it will start and finish the format of the drive, sometimes it will error and say that the disk is corrupt (it's not). Sometimes it will finish formatting, copy some files, then say it can't copy. Sometimes it will just blue screen and give a "stop" error. The stop error has always been random, no particular one.
I sent this board back to the dealer and they said it is fine. But they had a drive with XP already installed, they didn't try a clean install. I did try putting one of the drives into my other system with the K7T Turbo 2, install XP, and installed the inf for the RAID on this board in question. Didn't think it would work, and it didn't.
ANYONE have a solution? Any ideas? I am at a brick wall. And really don't want to junk this board just to get another one and a PCI RAID card.

I am having very similar issues with the K7T Turbo-r limited edition(w/ raid) board. I tried to upgrade to bios v3.6 and the raid funtion failed to load and then would lock on the Windows XP screen. Did safe mode boot and locked up on gernuwa.sys. Went all the way back to bios v2.6 and worked my up to v3.1, where the problems started over again. v3.0 seems to work just fine. In v3.1 they changed the promise raid in the bios. I have downloaded the latest drivers for the raid on that board, but have not installed yet. To install these drivers, do I just right click on .inf file and install from there, or should I use the liveUpdate program to do it? I am hoping that these new drivers will fix the raid issues and allow me to upgrade to a newer bios.

RAID limitation on K7T266Pro2-RU

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for