<div>
Sata 2 is faster, it has a higher transfer speed than sata 1 (double speed). Raid 1 isn't faster than no raid, to get speed with raid, you need raid 10, or raid 5 (raid 5 would give fast read speeds, writing is slower).
</div>


<div>
Just curious...why not use the 160GB's in a RAID 1 (if that's the RAID level you meant...I would think RAID 0 would give you better performance, but at a greater risk of data loss) and also throw in the 500GB as a regular &quot;secondary&quot; drive for storage, etc.
</div>


<div>
Thanks for your great suggestions so far. I have had too many problems with RAID 0 to try it again - and I like the idea of having a backup of my data. I thought RAID 5 or 10 all use more than 2 disks?<br />
<br />
From Wikipedia (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID_1#RAID_1" rel="ugc">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID_1#RAID_1</a>):<br />
<i></i>
<div class="indent">
<i>RAID 1 performance</i><i></i><i></i><i>Additionally, since all the data exists in two or more copies, each with its own hardware, the read performance can go up roughly as a linear multiple of the number of copies. That is, a RAID 1 array of two drives can be reading in two different places at the same time, though not all implementations of RAID 1 do this.</i><br />
<br />

</div>
From what I read here - I may be wrong, if I were to use 1 RAID controller for each disk then I would effectively double the read speed - there for 150MB/s would double to 300MB/s (same as SATA2). Is this correct? And what about the write speed?<br />

</div>


<div>
I see you posted while I was writing, so I'll add a follow-up. &nbsp; As I noted, there CAN be some gains in RAID-1 reads IF the controller supports it [basically, once a read request starts the transfer on one drive, it will start the other drive seeking for the next read]. &nbsp; However, this doesn't double the transfer rate ... it simply reduces the time until the next transfer can start (and may result in some overlap, thus improving the overall transfer speed). &nbsp; &nbsp;But these gains are NOT from SATA-I to SATA-II =&gt; they're from the sustained transfer rate to something faster than that ... even if it managed to double the effective rate, it would still be no faster than SATA-I speeds (except possibly on the outermost cylinders of the drives). &nbsp; In addition, an onboard controller most likely does not have this feature anyway.<br />

</div>


<div>
... and the write speed is not impacted at all =&gt; since all writes have to be done to BOTH disks. &nbsp; In fact, it can actually be slowed down a bit if there are any seek synchronization issues.<br />

</div>


<div>
Fantastic answer. Thank you for your long informative answer. It has helped me understand RAID a lot more.
</div>


<div>
Also, Thank you to rindi and tplaya07 for your suggestions and answers. <br />

</div>


<div>
<div class="content wysiwyg-content">
Hey,<br />
<br />
I have 2x 160GB Seagate SATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache Drives (ST3160815AS) and 1x 500GB Seagate SATA-2 &nbsp;7200rpm 32MB Cache Drive (ST3500320AS). <br />
<br />
I am wondering which option will give me the best performance. Which would be faster, running 2x 160GB SATA drives in RAID 1 or would the 500GB SATA-2 drive be faster?<br />
<br />
I am unsure what motherboard I am going to pair these drives with, but obviously it will SATA2 compatible, and I will just be using &quot;on-the-board&quot; RAID (not a dedicated RAID card).<br />
<br />
Let me know your thoughts... Also feel free to ask any questions...
</div>
</div>


Hey,

I have 2x 160GB Seagate SATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache Drives (ST3160815AS) and 1x 500GB Seagate SATA-2  7200rpm 32MB Cache Drive (ST3500320AS). 

I am wondering which option will give me the best performance. Which would be faster, running 2x 160GB SATA drives in RAID 1 or would the 500GB SATA-2 drive be faster?

I am unsure what motherboard I am going to pair these drives with, but obviously it will SATA2 compatible, and I will just be using "on-the-board" RAID (not a dedicated RAID card).

Let me know your thoughts... Also feel free to ask any questions...

RAID 1 SATA vs SATA 2 Hard Drive(s)

Computer data storage, often called storage or memory, is a technology consisting of computer components and recording media used to retain digital data. In addition to local storage devices like CD and DVD readers, hard drives and flash drives, solid state drives can hold enormous amounts of data in a very small device. Cloud services and other new forms of remote storage also add to the capacity of devices and their ability to access more data without building additional data storage into a device.

Storage

Storage devices include any device used for storing and retrieving digital information. Hard disk drives (HDDs) use one or more rigid ("hard") rapidly rotating disks (platters) coated with magnetic material. Data is accessed in a random-access manner, meaning that individual blocks of data can be stored or retrieved in any order and not only sequentially. The primary competing technology for secondary storage is flash memory in the form of solid-state drives (SSDs), but HDDs remain the dominant medium for secondary storage due to advantages in price per bit and per-device recording capacity. CD-RW (Compact Disc-ReWritable) is a digital optical disc storage format that allows information to be stored outside the mechanical HDD.

Storage Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP is the sixth release of the NT series of operating systems, and was the first to be marketed in a variety of editions: XP Home and XP Professional, designed for business and power users. The advanced features in XP Professional are generally disabled in Home Edition, but are there and can be activated. There were two 64-bit editions, an embedded edition and a tablet edition.