okay.,,,question- there is not doubt that the WD VelociRaptor is probably the fastest single serial ata hard drive in existance, i will not arque that...but would it not be better to just buy a couple of segate 7200.11 320gb seagate barracuda, and run them in raid 0 ....you are looking at $100 vs $300..

You're not gonna find many in these forums that'll support either. The VelociRaptor is too expensive & a RAID 0 config is too risky.

And you probably won't see any measurable increase in overall performance. Don't get sucked in by the hype. If you feel you MUST go down that road I would recommend the Raptor over RAID0. Also, you should image or backup your personal data no matter what type of storage you use.

Yup, what Jam and Othehill said.

wow...though there was a ton of support for the raptor....i do run raid on one rig...the thing i like about raid..seems like everything just flows nicely on my computer..sort of hard to explain

The other thing about RAID0 is that if "anything" happens to one of the drives the Array is broken. That can happen if the drive even does a self check. If you want to use RAID0 then if your board allows it you should add a third drive and run RAID 0+1. Or image the array to a third drive of enough capacity to hold the array contents.

yeah i'll always suggest against raid0 - the performance gains are arguable (as in, they fall somewhere between "negligible" and "all in your head"). More importantly, you're putting all the data on that partition at risk. HDDs are the least reliable part of a computer because they have the most MOVING parts. in Raid 0, EITHER drive failing causes the ENTIRE partition to be toast, even if one HDD is still working. i would either mirror your Data (raid1), or take 3+ drives and go for raid5. you'll lose a bit (1 drive's worth) of the storage capacity, but you'll be fault tolerant - if one drive dies, you can replace it without ever losing OS or Data.