azrael78

I'm not obsessed with speed so much - it was more a case of total confusion, one set of tools saying one thing and another saying something totally different. But thankfully I've managed to sort that out myself. However - all that said... I DO like the idea of a couple of SSDs running the OS The real thing becomes - do I get 2x 60GB (RAID-0) for just the OS, or do I get 1x 120GB (or larger) for more than the OS, but no RAID-0... Will see how much it costs first tho

Appreciate all the good info given here - a fresh reinstall is definately on the cards, but before I do that I've decided to look closer at my Hard Disks and RAID. If I use IOMeter or ATTO - I barely get above 30-50MB/s in reads. If I use HD Tach or HD Tune - I get the 88-95MB/s in reads. So my query really is - which result should I trust and what SHOULD I be getting in terms of speed? I'm sure that a complete wipe and reinstall with Win 7 will help things but if I should get a new mobo with better onboard RAID or invest in a hardware RAID card (or ditch the RAID altogether) - I'd rather know what I'm doing before I start to undertake things.

I was hoping that if I could cough up the cash (somehow), I could get 2x SSDs (60-80GB) and RAID-0 them for the OS and then take 3 of my remaining drives and turn them into a small RAID-5 for data. I don't store everything on 1 partition, I store the OS and 'criticial apps' on C:, non-critical apps on D:, MP3s on E: and games on F:. While that may not be to everyones' liking, it works well for me as I like to keep things organised. However, with the above, it means my games wouldn't get the benefit of the SSDs, however that (theoretically) shouldn't be too much of an issue if I were to rebuild from scratch as the current 80Mb/s I get would be greatly increased my properly aligning my drives and formatting etc. The link that Arthur posted however suggested that having an EVEN number of RAID-5 disks didn't really help performance compared to an ODD number - whether that applied simply if you were going to manually realign them or whether it applied if you did a totally fresh install and let Win 7 handle it - I don't know.

Thank you both for your input, I wasn't thinking clearly when I wrote about throwing games in a VM. I'm under the impression that - like servers, having many VMs with smaller services is better? Is this not true for workstations? E.g. Is it better to have one install (as I don't want to have to be rebooting to do certain things) that covers everything or would 'farming' some items out to VMs be beneficial? I also neglected to mention that yes - I am running XP x32, not x64. @Arthur: Will read the report from StorageReview, I was never sure about the RAID and my speed of HDs does seem slow, but is this down to the individual HD or is it the RAID part that's causing my bottlenecks? Replacing hard drives is an option but I see nothing wrong with the drives I have and don't wish to spend money if I don't absolutely have to - I'd have to buy a copy of Win 7 x64 as it is. Edit: After reading the post regarding RAID... simply put... OMG!. So I'm guessing if I blank EVERYTHING (including the RAID array in the BIOS), recreate the array and then install Win 7, letting it format everything, I'd get much better throughput?

Firstly, this topic has nothing to do with schools or education at all - what-so-ever, perhaps it has more to do with my education but you'd only be able to make a very slim connection there My trusty PC has been doing a lovely job for the past 3 years, however... it's started showing its age (as all things do I guess). Before you all scream about buying a new PC vs Upgrading - neither of those is a realistic option. Sure, a minor upgrade of a few bits might be doable but certainly nothing huge. Which leads me to the meat and potatoes of the issue. I'd like a more responsive and active PC than what I have, but I can't afford to throw in all kinds of new hardware to do that. So the solution must be primarily software-based. I have cleaned up my XP install as much as I can but even that only goes so far. I'm leaning toward wiping and starting over, but it's taken me a long time to get all the little 'twiddly bits' and things working the way I like (backing up my profile just isn't an option as it's more than that). The PC itself is the typical 'one OS - many uses' platform, not something I'd like but Windows is like a plate of spaghetti - pulling at it mercilessly makes a mess. The specs of the PC are as follows: MB: Asus StrikerExtreme (nForce 680i Chipset) CPU: Core 2 Quad - Q6600 @ 2.4GHz RAM: 8GB (4x 2GB DDR2) (Corsair CM2X2048-6400C5) VIDEO: ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB HD: NVidia RAID (1.45TB) - 6x Seagate 320GB (ST3320620AS) (RAID-5) (HD Tune gives it around 89.5Mb/per-sec average in this configuration) SND: Asus Xonar D2X It's running XP SP3 with all the latest updates available for it. Now in terms of what options I have - I've given it some thought myself and have come up with the following: 1) Backup XP Pro installation, format and install Win 7 x64 - take 'pot luck' on games and some apps that may not work well. 2) Backup XP Pro installation, format and install Win 7 x64, install VirtualBox/VirtualPC and virtualise specialised PC functions (Games, Multimedia encoding, etc) into seperate VMs. 3) Install Win 7 x64 alongside existing XP Pro install, slowly migrate settings and apps to Win 7 and then delete XP Pro install. What I'm not sure of, is whether, with options #1 or #2, I should wipe the RAID configuration and set it up to do something more beneficial than RAID-5, not sure if the controller supports RAID-10 - it definately does 0, 1, 0+1, 5 and JBOD. Now, I'm happy to take any suggestions (even if they DO involve buying hardware), suggestions also about whether using RAID-5 in a workstation are advisable would also be helpful. (I didn't have a good backup plan prior to setting up the RAID-5 which is why I did that - now my backup system is much better) Thanks for any help or assistance you can offer

What's the underlying difference between the 5770 and the 5830 aside from price? The core and memory speeds certainly look the same or similar. I'm missing something obvious I'm sure Az

I was looking at the 5670 but so far most people favour the 5770 here so I will give it a further looky. Does the 512MB/1GB version matter aside from memory size? Do you really need 1GB on a graphics card these days? Az

I currently have an ATI HD2900XT card, it's been a lovely card and has done all that I've asked of it until lately. Due to various issues I now have with the card (it cuts out by itself, whether the PC has been in use for 10 minutes or 5 hours or whatever) - I'm looking at replacing it with something more modern. I realise the old ATI vs NVidia debate is as old as Mac vs PC - however over my time as a PC enthusiast I've had both makes of card and have found that both can do a nice job. The reason I'm ATI currently is that my last 2 NVidia cards died by themselves in quick succession (I was able to get them refunded) - so I figure give ATI a go. I initially had an ATI X1950 Pro card and upgraded to the HD2900XT. I'm on a budget - I can afford no more than £150-£160 for a card that will last at least 2-3 years. (When I say 'last' I mean that it will still be able to play some games as long as the spec of the game isn't way beyond what the card can support) So - what would you all recommend as an upgrade to my card? I'm happy to stick with ATI or give NVidia another go, the make itself doesn't hugely bother me - as long as the hardware works and does what I need of it. Cheers, Az

I'd be more inclined to agree with nephilim - get a bigger drive, clone your existing drive onto the new one and then remove the old drive and put it away somewhere safe (just incase things don't go to plan). Depending on your backup solution, you could always take a full backup and do a bare-metal restore onto a bigger drive as well, but ideally you'd want to just migrate the drive rather than move things around in the AD - keeps everything the same after the upgrade and means you can update the OS with patches and such. HTH, Az

Not so sure about this - only in as much as the WAIK for Windows 7 doesn't support doing anything to an XP or Vista (non-SP2) image I don't think - or if it DOES support XP/Vista (Pre-SP2) I never got it to work properly. It kept complaining about wrong image versions and such - so I used the Server 2008/Vista edition of the WAIK which seemed happy to handle everything up to Win 7/Server 2008R2. HTH, Az

Well I'm due for a phone upgrade in July - I must admit that the HTC Desire is coming out on top for me - especially with so many others recommending it. But I have to ask the stupid question... I currently have a Nokia 5800 XpressMusic. I'm assuming there will be *some* way to transfer my contacts and such to the Desire and that it has some kind of PC-based software suite that means I can back up the phone to PC etc. But the list of Apps for Android are... impressive. I've always used Symbian phones, so this - if I go for it - will be my first Android. Az

I firmly fall into the 'hate it' camp - I don't care if that makes me unpopular or unpatriotic or any other carp that someone may 'make up' just because I'm a bloke who hates football (infact I'm not a sporty person at all - not even remotely). I'm not saying everyone has to hate it or any of that - but as jamesb said... why all the mania? You want to enjoy your football, go for it - be my guest, but it's absolutely manic out there. Flags everywhere, horns... I mean it's like the country goes crazy over a GAME - in which regular life MUST stop and everyone MUST support and watch. I agree that no-one here is saying that explicitly... but with all the mania about it feels like it's being rammed down my throat and that's what I really hate. If I've upset any football-lovers then I apologise, I'm not trying to make enemies or urinate on someone's fun - just remember that there are those of us who just can't stick it. Az

Are these the same problems that we spoke of some time ago regarding your NAS backup - or is this something else entirely? I recall a problem previously about backups not working with NTBackup - but nothing about the NAS being unavailable... Could be I'm confused - throw me a PM and I'll see what I can do Az

Here we use RAID-5 for pretty much everything with a few exceptions, where we use RAID-1+0. My personal choice would be RAID-1+0. If you are doing a daily backup that will give you an additional layer of protection against serious data loss, but don't rely soley on your backup, if you have the capacity (and cash) to add hardware redundancy then do so. The RAID 1 (Mirror) will give you extra redundancy as well. Not that I'm slating RAID-5 or 10 but RAID-1+0 sounds like it fits the schools' primary 'we want performance' requirement as well as giving you redundancy as well. Az

Yes mate, I have seen them - absolutely EPIC. Didn't realise just how much I'd enjoy it - now I love it and almost don't want to get to Season 8... Az