Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I will be using one of these configurations for my VMWare Workstation Development VM's (with the RAID setup I can probably get my games on there too). I will mostly be running a Win 7 VM with Visual Studio and SQL Server and I'm looking to get some better performance (load times, compile times, etc). Which of these configurations would you recommend for me?


share|improve this question
up vote 0 down vote accepted

Well, that's a tricky one...

The RIAD-0 will give the better performance - 2 sets of heads moving independently coupled with double the data transfer bandwidth will easily out-perform a single set of heads even if the drive is spinning 33% faster.


You also double the chances of losing all your data if you have a disk crash. Lose one disk and you lose the content of both disks. If you run RAID-0 then backups are essential.

Personally I would never ever recommend RAID-0 for anything other than scratch-space (storage for files that don't matter if they get lost), but if the speed is that important and you're happy with doing the backups (I'd have 2 RAID-0 setups and mirror them on a regular basis or something similar) and to take the risk of data loss then go for the RAID-0.

share|improve this answer
Thanks! I'm okay with the RAID 0 risks - in addition to the RAID 0 I will have an internal 1TB and external 500GB backups via Norton Ghost for my development work. Good to hear RAID 0 is better in this situation since it will be cheaper and provide me with additional space for games. – Michael Mello Apr 24 '11 at 14:40

I think the Raptors will be faster for you. To put it simply: RAID 0 will have better bandwidth, but the Raptors will have better latency. For the workload you're describing, latency is going to be the more noticable because you're working with lots of disparate files rather than fewer, large files.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.