• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

System requirements for Premiere Pro CS5

LEGEND ,
Mar 12, 2011 Mar 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Adobe has on its website the Adobe Premiere Pro CS5: System Requirements

Unfortunately, this overview is severely lacking in realism and a lot of people were disappointed when their system met these minimum requirements, but still would not do what they expected, or at least not without jerkiness, hiccups and similar issues.

The problem with these requirements as stated is that they are really bare minimum requirements to install the software, but unfortunately it does not tell how well a certain system will perform with the myriad of codecs used and the different needs and expectations people may have about their editing rig. Since this issue is nearly a year old now and nothing tangible has changed, I decided to write this article to help people understand what is realistic to expect, what influences the hardware choices in order to use CS5 to full satisfaction.

CAVEAT: This is my personal opinion, in no way authorized or endorsed by Adobe, who have not seen anything I write here till the moment it has been published here.

Context:

The nature of one's editing projects can have a major impact on the hardware required to run projects effectively. Long form documentaries, delivered on BRD demand different hardware and priorities in hardware setup then music clips with lots of multicam work and color effects delivered to the web, or wedding video's delivered on DVD. And unfortunately, there is no simple rule saying that if you edit X, you need Y hardware.

The second thing that has a major impact is the source material, the codec used. Back in the old days things were very simple, you had DV material from a tape based camera and that was it. Nowadays, things have grown much more complex. The number of codecs used in source material has grown enormously, the number of formats and frame rates has grown in a similar fashion. We used to have 480, now we have added 720, 1080, 2K, 3K, 4K plus various DSLR and other formats, we had interlaced, now we have progressive as well, we used to have 25 or 29.97 FPS, now we have 24, 25, 29.97, 60 and even more frame rates. We had DV, now we have MPEG2, HDV, XDCAM, P2, AVCHD, RED, Cineform, Matrox, and numerous other codecs.

This makes it all the more confusing for people to know what they need when they start out with video editing to run CS5 successfully.

The codec issue:

Some codecs are easy to handle for a computer, others are difficult to handle. It is generally known that DV material is very easy to handle and AVCHD is pretty tough to handle. The general rule is that the more compressed the material is, the harder it is for the computer to edit this. GOP (Group of Pictures) structure is an extra burden. The higher the resolution, the harder it is on the computer.

To simplify matters one could differentiate codecs and source material in three categories, based on their properties:

Codec.png

Of course boundaries when using three categories are not always very clear, but the tendency is rather clear. Easy codecs are in the upper left corner, difficult codecs are in the lower right corner. For that reason we have identified three categories, Easy, Intermediate and Difficult.

This is somewhat similar to the color coding PR uses with none, yellow and red in the time line. It is not complete in the overview of common codecs, but is intended to show what the impact can be of different codecs and the hardware requirements.

I realize this is a limited overview and generic in nature. It will not answer all questions, but may be helpful to avoid disappointments. It also has a number of limitations. For instance, uncompressed MS AVI SD material. No GOP structure, no compression, low resolution, that should be at the top left corner, right? Wrong. Uncompressed does not burden the CPU, but is a definite burden on the memory and disk I/O system.

What does that mean in terms of requirements?

System requirements:

System requirements CS5.png

If the codecs you generally use are slightly more than just plain "easy", look at the improvemnts in the next column and repeat for the next column if applicable.

I hope this can benefit people to understand there is more to choosing a system than just following the Adobe site.

Additions or suggestions for improvements are welcome.

Views

144.3K

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
replies 122 Replies 122
Community Beginner ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Wow!  Good to know.  My computer compnay just shipped them to me and I haven't put them in yet.  I have had really bad

luck with Seagate and better luck with Western Digital.  I don't have the money to lay out for 4 1TB VelociRaptor drives.

Does anyone know how the Western Digital Black drives would perform with RAID 0?  I have had 1 for my OS and 1 for a data drive that I just store images and documents on for about 6 months and they seem okay.  Or is there another comparable drive that you would recommend within that price range.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Get rid of the partitioning, Drive are cheap

You have the OS, applications and the project on the same disk drive = very bad setup.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

No, the OS and project file is on a WD Black Drive.  The capture files are on a RAID 0 array and the render files are on a 2nd RAID 0 array.  The OS drive has a dual boot hence the 2 partitions.  The RAID drives are single partitions.

I was confused because I read a few posts suggesting putting the project file on the capture drive.  I only put my render files on the same drive as my captured clips temporarily because my render array just died.

Now that I'm putting in 2 completely new replacement arrays I was wondering what the best setup and drives were.  I know RAID 0 is not as reliable since there is no mirror but I still want to get as stable and speedy a setup as possible.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I just spoke with Western Digital tech support and read them your comment about RAID 0.  They said they never heard of this issue with either RE4 or Caviar. RE4 and Black drives both have TLER specifically so they don't drop off RAID arrays.  The tech support guy went as far as saying RE4 stands for RAID Edition 4.  Now I'm more confused.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guide ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

WD support in this case is clueless!

Here's the scoop...

RAID stands for Redundant Array Independent Disks (somebody correct me if I got this a little wrong, I'm going from memory), and the intent was to have an array where a drive, or 2 drives in the case of RAID 6, could fail and NO data would be lost.

Enter RAID 0; some people even call it non-RAID or AID 0 (missing the R, which stands for redundant), because there is nothing redundant about it. RAID 0 is all about speed, and if either drive fails, all is lost.

WD, and their competitors, manufacture and market drives for both markets. In WD's case I understand the differences to be:

1) RAID drives are advertised, and maybe are or are not, using better hand picked platters with less defects; also likely better overall QA and testing

2) Firmware is generally a bit different, optimized slightly for use in RAID arrays for network server applications vs. single workstation drive needs

3) RAID drives are said to have better bearings, and designs that are less bothered by neigboring drives in a long hot-swap bank where heads are all seeking at the same time and in the same direction

4) Finally, TLER; WD calls it TLER, other drive manufacturers do something similar for their RAID drives but call it something different. TLER stands for Time Limit Error Recovery; it means that the drive will limit how long it will try to recover an error. [Sidebar: I have some RE drives and also some older Blacks that allow for this feature to be toggled on and off, and the number of seconds to be set for "TLER" to take place]. The actual purpose is to have a drive "fail" and drop off of the RAID quickly (default is set to 7 seconds), so that the performance of the RAID will continue to serve its users instead of hunting, seeking, and trying to recover of what was "lost" on just one drive; at this point either an IT person or hot-spare drive gets added back to replace the "dropped" drive and the array auto-rebuilds (without the "dropped" drive).

For desktop users the needs are quite different; for example, I had a failing laptop HD one time, which never lost one single thing, but before I replaced it opening or saving a file could take 30 seconds instead of 1 second while the drive would use its built in ECC (error correction) to get the job done. If this drive were to have had a TLER feature, I would definitely have lost data and files instead of just having to wait.

This may be a bit confusing, but TLER is a great feature for a RAID array used for enterprise business purposes. It is terrible for RAID 0 or single-disk installations.

Whew!

Hope this helps - bottom line, drives intended for RAID are BAD for RAID 0.

Jim

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guide ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

One more thing, WD definitely does not allow for TLER to be turned on for any of their non-RAID, non-Enterprise, drives manufactured in approx. the past 2 years. They may or may not allow for RAID drives to have TLER turned on/off and allow for the user to adjust the timeout. RE3 drives for certain allow for this to be done, I can't speak for RE4 drives.

So, it may be possible to turn off TLER on the RE4 drives and then they would work fine with RAID 0. If you want to try, Google TLER to find the utility; I don't think that WD has given it to users for at least 3 years now.

I was upset, as were many hobbiests building RAIDs with WD Blacks on the cheap, when WD stopped allowing their TLER utility to work for their early 32MB cach 1TB Black series drives; however, so far as I know, no other vendor ever had a utility where this could be done by users. I did not mention it, but all HD suppliers charge a huge premium for their "RAID" drives, even when they sometimes appear to be awfully similar, as was the case 3 years ago with WD 1TB RE3 drives vs. 1TB Blacks.

Jim

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

When I spoke to WD they said that TLER can't be disabled or adjusted for the Black or RE4 drives.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Actually, TLER is permanently disabled on the Black drives - and all of the other "consumer" desktop WD drives - manufactured since October 2009. (The manufacturing date is the date on the drive's label, not the date of purchase.) There is no way at all whatsoever to enable TLER on the Black or on any other "consumer" desktop WD drive made recently.

That makes the WD desktop drives ill-suited for use in a parity RAID (RAID 3, 5 or 6) since most RAID controllers themselves give up reading after 8 seconds when they encounter a read error - and they mark the entire drive as "failed" even though it is actually still good. That's bad.

The RE-series drives are not recommended for RAID 0 (which Harm calls "aid0") simply because they offer no advantages at all whatsoever over a conventional desktop drive for this purpose. In fact, if one drive has a read error, the entire RAIDed pair or coupling may be dropped, resulting in possible loss of all of the data in the array.

Message was edited by: RjL190365

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

ONLY the desktop drives have TLER disabled (thank goodness)

RE most certainly have TLER.

desktop for Raid 0,1,10 (only 0 makes sense)

for parity raid (5,6) RE drives are needed

for those on a budget (dont want to buy an 8 drive raid array and "good" raid card)

2x 2 drive raid 0 is the best option and more than enough for most peoples needs.

Raid 10 is a waste unless you want low budget redundacy using the onboard raid

problem with that is its slower than 2 x 2 raid 0

you should never read and write from the same drive set this slows your exports by a good amount.

nothing replaces a good external back up regardless of what your drive config is.

Scott

ADK

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks.  So if I wanted to do 2 RAID 0 arrays what hard drives would you recommend using and what's your experience with long term stability?  I backup nightly to an external 2 TB drive and clone the drives weekly to a 3 TB since ther eis no mirror.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I like the WD blacks due to the 64meg cache 90% of our NLE systems ship with 2 x2 drive raid 0 with these drives

as far as reliability we sell a ton of those and a ton of seagates on the audio side of things (quieter) (about 3-400 a month)

don’t have issues with either.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I just heard back from Adaptec and they are telling me that my Adaptec 5405 is fine to use with WD RE4 drives on RAID0 and that TLER is a good thing too.  I'm hearing such vastly different answers that this is confusing.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

TLER is NOT good for raid 0 well its pointless

TLER is required (if you not want issues) for raid 5,6

I would do an onboard raid 0 (export) and a raid 5 with the Adpatec for media and other

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Not understadning why you would want Two sets of RAID0 drives.

Videoguys recommends the following:

C: Boot drive. 500GB or bigger. A 7200 RPM drive willwork just fine. If you want faster bootup and program opens, right now a 10K RPM drive is a better value then SSD, but not as fast.


D: RAID for Video.Can be internal or external. For External we recommend G-Tech and Glyph.

  •           Option 1:A pair of drives  RAID0 gives you performance and value. 2 x 2TB= 4TB of usable space, but no redundancy if a drive fails.
  •           Option 2: 4 drives set up as a RAID 5. This gives you performance plus redundancy. 4 x 2TB = 6TB of usable space

E: Export drive. Single 7200RPM drive. Your exports will go smoother and faster if you output the files to a dedicated physical drive, rather then the D: RAID. You can also set up a partition or folder on your C: drive for the exports. Not as good as a dedicated drive, but better then exporting to the same drives as your project resides on. Another benefit of having a dedicated E: drive is that you can use it for back-ups, digital photo library, MP3 library, etc.

You can find this plus a whole lot more info in Videoguys Video Storage FAQ

Gary

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi,

I have a 7200rpm WD Black for my Os which I keep my project file on.

I have an E drive (WD Black) just for pictures and documents.

I have a RAID0  for capture.  Why wouldn't I want my render and preview files on a RAID0 array?  Wouldn't it be faster access when you preview on the timeline?  I also find that HD clips play back choppy on non-raided drives so that's why I store my rendered movies on a RAID0 array.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

HI Gary,

Balance my man balance

With the raid 0 for export your export is faster.

Most of my clients biggest complaint is render(export) times

A single drive would be dog slow unless you are talking about DV/HDV

External is good for 1 thing only back up. Based on cost factor..

Most cases have enough room for plenty of internal.

Still thinking about your email... not ignoring you.

Thanks

Scott

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Got it. I didn't realize the second RAID 0 was for the export. That makes perfect sense.

Have you guys tested exporting to an SSD drive? That would be even faster and even a 128GB SSD should be big enough for any export files.

GAry

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

HI Gary,

We tried multiple configs with SSD

As OS, as a tempfile/cache only drive (no one needs this at all anyway) 2 sets raid 0 etc etc

Its was only a few seconds faster with the 2 sets raid 0 SSD than standard 2 sets raid 0 sata.

From a 30 minute time so complete waste of $

Its more that A: the cpu is a bottleneck at that point and B: also have reached bus/drive thruput saturation.

Had i tried it with red4k it might have been different.

Now heavy animators can definitely take advantage of SSD

Scott

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

WOW, I have just returned from a very busy week (you may have heard about our riots). Anyhow, to 21 emails and some fascinating info.

Having just ordered:

CS5.5 Production Premium

Antec 902 v3

1050w Corsair

Rampage lll Extreme

i7 990x with Akasa Venom h/s

24GB (6x4) Corair XMS3

Gainward GTX580 1536Mb GDDR3

WD6000HLHX 10k o/s programmes

3 x WD1001FALS Video work (2 intended to be RAID 0)

1 x WD1001FALS

Stills/audio/graphic design work

1 x External 1TB Buffalo (back-up data)

LG BH10LS30

ASUS 27" 2MS monitor

Around my drive set up - has anyone got any criticism?

Anything I have missed/could do with?

Maybe you have an idea or two to suggest an efficient set-up for the above?

It's not too late for me to make changes.

Peter

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:33:55 -0600

From: forums@adobe.com

To: peterbaylis@live.co.uk

Subject: System requirements for Premiere Pro CS5

HI Gary,

We tried multiple configs with SSD

As OS, as a tempfile/cache only drive (no one needs this at all anyway) 2 sets raid 0 etc etc

Its was only a few seconds faster with the 2 sets raid 0 SSD than standard 2 sets raid 0 sata.

From a 30 minute time so complete waste of $

Its more that A: the cpu is a bottleneck at that point and B: also have reached bus/drive thruput saturation.

Had i tried it with red4k it might have been different.

Now heavy animators can definitely take advantage of SSD

Scott

>

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guide ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Peter,

Your system spec. sounds great!

I would suggest spending just the slightest bit more ($27 using Newegg pricing as a reference, and actually less if you send in for the rebate) to go with an Intel 510 series 120GB drive for OS/programs. Of course if you really need more space for the OS drive, this would not work, but if 120GB is enough the SSD read speed and seek performance blow away the VR. Yes I realize many here say VR is a great OS drive and more affordable than SSDs, but once you get to the price point for the 600GB size they are not less $ (only less per $/GB). SSDs do not work well for video work, but they are awesome OS/program drives.

Another minor point, I prefer Cooler Master's deeper chassis design with the large, slow, quiet fans for drive cooling and rear exhaust (i.e. HAF 932, HAF-X, etc.).

Jim

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 13, 2011 Aug 13, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks Jim I will check those out now.

Peter

Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:44:42 -0600

From: forums@adobe.com

To: peterbaylis@live.co.uk

Subject: System requirements for Premiere Pro CS5

Peter,

Your system spec. sounds great!

I would suggest spending just the slightest bit more ($27 using Newegg pricing as a reference, and actually less if you send in for the rebate) to go with an Intel 510 series 120GB drive for OS/programs. Of course if you really need more space for the OS drive, this would not work, but if 120GB is enough the SSD read speed and seek performance blow away the VR. Yes I realize many here say VR is a great OS drive and more affordable than SSDs, but once you get to the price point for the 600GB size they are not less $ (only less per $/GB). SSDs do not work well for video work, but they are awesome OS/program drives.

Another minor point, I prefer Cooler Master's deeper chassis design with the large, slow, quiet fans for drive cooling and rear exhaust (i.e. HAF 932, HAF-X, etc.).

Jim

>

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 11, 2011 Aug 11, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks so much Jim.  This really clarifies things.  That said, what 1TB drives would you recommend if I still wanted to do RAID 0?

I have an Adaptec 5405 RAID controller and want to use (4) 1 TB drives with it.  What RAID configuration would you suggest that would be best suited for DV and AVCHD editing?  I'm a little fuzzy on the types of RAID setups.

Is there a RAID option that would give me the performance of RAID 0 with (2) 1 TB drives combined and then mirrored for better data protection?  The result would be that render and capture files would be on the same array.  Would this be a performance issue for HD video editing or in general?

Thanks for your patience:)

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Aug 12, 2011 Aug 12, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

What you want for your four drives is RAID 10, theorticlly gives you the speed of two drives in RAID 0 with two drives mirroring those two.  After you set it up you might want to test it to check the performance as I do not know what the Adaptec is capable of doing.  Of course you could ao try it with your onboard Intel controller.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Aug 14, 2011 Aug 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Do not ever, ever, ever use RAID 0. It may be the fastest, and one of the

cheapest, but you get what you pay for, the most UNRELIABLE. Yea, I can

here it now, I have been using it for years with no problems, it works well

for me, and all of that stuff. Don't be fooled, it is twice (almost) as

fast as a single drive, but also twice as likely to fail and loose data. If

you are doing this as a profession, then use the slower RAID 1 so you can

have the added reliability even though it is slower. If you want the speed

of RAID 0 the use the RAID 10 which will give you speed of RAID 0 and

reliability of RAID 1 together. Believe me, if you loose important data the

is not recoverable of very time consuming, you will quickly understand the

importance of what I said. However, RAID 10 needs 5 or more drives.

Also, you can capture and render on the same drive setup, but it does take

up more space. Capturing and rendering on separate drives or drive systems

give a little more reliability which is not needed for RAID 10, but better

for RAID 0.

Tom

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Aug 14, 2011 Aug 14, 2011

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Do not ever, ever, ever use RAID 0.

I beg to differ.  I have 2x 1 TB RAID0s; one for media and one for Projects/Renders.  The trick is to have reliable and frequent backups.  I have a 4 TB RAID5 as a backup destination, and I use StorageCraft's ShadowProtect as my backup software.  It's set to automatically make a full backup twice a week at 2 AM, and to make incremental backups every 2 hours daily.  Because of the way that ShadowProtect makes backups, at the sector level and writing only changed sectors, most of my 2-hourly backups take less than 3 seconds.  And when it occasionally turns out that hundreds of MBs or even a couple of GBs need backing up when the scheduled backup starts, ShadowProtect runs in the background with minimal (read: almost unnoticeable) performance degradation and is still incredibly fast.

So you *can* use a RAID0, you just have to be smart about it.

-Jeff

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines