Picking out another hard drive for my 6831FX

So, after using my stock 260 gig (I think that's the size) HD, I've decided I'll go ahead and buy another one. I have a few easy questions though (or I hope they're easy).

Firstly, I've been eyeing this particular HD from newegg, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136197

I've read that this 5400rpm HD can be faster than like the 200gig 7200rpm hard drives, is this really possible?

Secondly, how much more power drain does an extra hard drive usually require. I've read that the supplied AC adapter doesn't allow much overclocking, so hopefully the little bit of undervolting I did on my cpu will free up some more room for power.

Lastly, what is with this RAID configuration I keep hearing about. Does it improve performance? And I keep hearing about security among RAID configurations, I don't see how those two connect.

Oh, right...so back to my hard drive, has anyone bought this? Is it RAIDable with another HD of different capacity?

Thanks for putting up with all these questions x.x

 

the WD320BEVT 5400 rpm is faster than most smaller capacity drives due to a higher data density.

with regards to the RAID configuration....you can use your current drive together with a higher capacity drive, but the RAID array will read both drives as the lower capacity.

with the 6831 and 6860, you have the choice of setting up RAID as either RAID 0 or RAID 1. RAID 0 will increase performance as it separates the data, storing one half of it on one drive, and the other half on the other drive. i will attest to RAID 0 increasing performance, as i have 2 320gb wd BEVT drives running in RAID 0, and i've noticed an increase in performance of at least 20% when logging on, opening applications...etc.

RAID 1 will create a mirror image of one drive, so should your primary drive fail, you have a complete backup on the other drive.

and the WD320BEVT power specifications http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=377

 

The above message is approved.

P6831FX comes with 250 GB originally.

In short, Raid 1 = security
Raid 0 = performance

As I understand it, Raid 1 also offers some gain in performance?

 

that would be correct, grasshopper. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks

@zerg...your best bet if you want to use RAID without upgrading both hard drives, just find an identical capacity hard drive from www.newegg.com or the like.

 

Well I went to look for the pricing on the 250gb model that is identical to mine, and it costs more than the 320gb hd. Since I don't demand RAID, I suppose using the stock and the new hd as two separate drives will be fine right? (I believe the obvious answer to this is yes)

 

that would be correct, but i must ask what the drive is you currently have in the laptop...maybe some of us on this forum can find you a deal.

note: for raid, it does not have to be the same exact drive, but without wasting space, it should be the same capacity drive. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...80 1309729183 1035907918&bop=And&Order=PRICED

 

Under device manager, my current one is the WDC WD2500BEVS-22UST0 ATA 5400rpm. From what I read, seems like if you RAID it a certain way, you're still stuck with only 250 gigs, except that it constantly backs up your harddrive? Doesn't seem like a great way to maximize the usage of all that extra gigs.

 

correct. but i was assuming you wanted the extra drive for performance, not stability. in RAID 0 using 2 250gb drives, windows will read it as 1 500 gb drive, whereas with RAID 1 using 2 250gb drives, windows will read it as 1 250 gb drive.

 

For my purposes, it seems RAID 1 is out the window. So how exactly does RAID 0 differ from just having 2 hard drives with no RAID config at all? From the first post, he said something about storing half and half. Seems kind of funky. So if it's a picture, half the data is on one hd and the rest is on another? Sounds like a surefire way to lose the whole picture if one hd dies. Or am I interpreting this all wrong? x.x

 

you've oversimplified it a bit, but basically your concept is right on the money.

I run 2 of the 320gb WD hard drives but i keep them separate for exactly that reason. I would hate to lose my whole array just because 1 hard drive failed.

So i have a 320gb C drive and a separate 320gb D drive.

I know the math is slim for an array to actually crash...but for some reason the terror of losing 583gb of data keeps me from raiding for performance over a slightly better sense of security of at least half of my data.

Plus if i just want performance i can get a 64gb SSD for the OS and application programs and a 500gb drive for stored media and files. Then you get the best of both worlds

 

definately the 320 gb 5400 rpm wd hd from newegg is the smartest buy for 110

Some things a 7200 rpm hd is always going to do faster than a 5400 rpm one but overall the bigger hd is faster in thoroughput

I do believe your smartest bet with 2 hds might actually be to have one 7200 rpm one and one large 5400 rpm one and actually use each for different applications.

 

Would it be smartest in this case to use the 7200RPM HDD for the boot/OS drive and the original drive for data?

 

Yep, Speedy boots and lower load times on your main drive is always nice. So i would put the 7200rpm drive as my OS/Application drive

For my storage drive i could care less if it was a 4200rpm drive honestly. Music and movies and documents pull up pretty easily on just about any speed drive

 

Plus isn't having to seperate HDDs better for multi-tasking?
i.e:
I heard running FRAPS on a seperate HDD than your game will allow for a better FPS during recording.

 

OP. I've got an almost brand new Scorpio 320gb sitting here if you wanna save a few $$$. I'm in no pinch to sell it, but if someone wanted it and offered a decent price, id surely ship on that way.

 

From the 6920 you won, you lucky sod, you?

 

LOL. Nah. That one came with a 250gb, I was just offering to upgrade to the 320gb if they wanted. I actually got this one from newegg for another laptop that totally crapped before I got to use it.

 

Thanks for the info...

 

Oh well i confused you with oversimplification.

A larger hd as your windows drive could boot faster than a 7200 rpm one. Its a case by case comparison.

I do believe the fastest booting drive is the 500 gb 5400 rpm hd.

I GUESS that if you had 2 drives, a 320 5400 rpm one and a 200 gb 7200 rpm one the 200 gb one as your windows drive would be faster because access time is faster on a faster spinning hd. And then if you got your big applications and movies on the bigger drive, those would load faster because of higher density.

 

No its not. Both the hitachi and samsung drives have performance issues.