Bill, this is extremely helpful. So here's my question - what would be faster (used as a media drive), a single sata III 7200 RPM or an external RAID 0 (two 7200 disks) connected with FW800? Without physically being able to test data rates I would guess that the internal HDD may be just as fast despite being only one physical disk?
Now what if the FW800 connection was upgraded to USB 3.0? Who would have the edge?
Here's why I'm asking - I'm looking to do a custom build as affordable as I can without shooting myself in the foot. Currently I edit off of an external RAID 0 (two 7200 disks) that is connected with FW800. It seems I am able to scrub and seek several streams of video fine in PP CS6. So I'm curious if I could get similar, if not better results (maybe with render times) with a single, internal sata III drive for a lot less money than the cost of an external raid?
Thanks for your time.
I looked for some performance charts, that might tell us both, which would be faster, but could not find anything for the scenario that you outline.
I would lean to the internal SATA III, and more so, considering that RAID 0 on most extrenals is akin to using a RAID chip on a MoBo . Now, if you were talking about a RAID 0 controlled by a dedicated controller card, such as the Areca, in an enclosure, or internal, then I would bet on the RAID.
If I can find a chart with the above options, I will gladly publish it here. Until then, I am only guessing, based on performance benchmarks from other sources.
EddieV posted this in a Tips & Tricks thread, but I thought that he would get better, and more complete answers here.
I Branched the thread, and then Moved it here.