Why do you have raptor HDs?

Why do you guys buy raptor hard drives? Is there some special benefit in having them? I read that you guys usually get 2 of them and distribute files on both. Can someone explain the ideal setup for a good computer?
85 answers Last reply
More about raptor
  1. Raptors have 16mb of cache, and at 10.000rpm...make's them the best sata HD out there. If you pair them in raid-0 they are even better. I have a raid0 setup with 2x80gb hd(sata2 and ncq) that can do the job of one raptor.
    The choice is up to you.
  2. I have 2x74Gb Raptor in Raid 0 for my OS and related programs and as well as my games. Faster boot and game loading time.
  3. Quote:
    I have 2x74Gb Raptor in Raid 0 for my OS and related programs and as well as my games. Faster boot and game loading time.


    Yeah and if one dies you're screwed.


    I have two 74GB Raptors but only because I bought them for $75 each. I wouldn't pay $150 for 74GB of space. Not when I can get 500GB (2x250) for the same price now.
  4. You're right but with my experience with Wester Digital, I trust them HDs. I have been using them from the beginning of my first build and none have failed me so far or given my any problems.

    Well, I got 250Gb WD HD for storage and backup in case this problem happens.
  5. Using two drives together is called RAID. Click here for detailed information on RAID. The types of RAID that are most commonly and easily done are level 0 and level 1.

    Think of hard drives like secretaries. Having two or more secretaries can provide great results in different ways.
    - RAID 0 is like having two (or more) secretaries work together to get things done faster. Depending on the situation, the benifits may vary as to how much it benifits the office.
    - RAID 1 is like having two secretaries copying each other and doing the same thing. Doing this may end up being a little bit slower than if only one person was doing it, but you gain something else in return. If one secretary has to call in sick, the other one will allow the office to keep right on trucking without missing a beat. Basically, if one of the two hard drives stops working, you don't loose any data and you do not have to reinstall anything.

    A good setup for a computer is to have a lot of hard drive speed for you Windows installation and then a slower but much higher capacity hard drive for storage of things like games, movies, music, pictures, backup, ect.

    A good example of this setup would be to have a raptor with Windows installed on it and a 250+ GB hard drive for storage. If you do not have anything that takes up very much room on your computer and 250 GB is way overkill then a 40 or 80 GB would be just fine for storage.

    If you have a high budget then you could do something like having two raptors with RAID 0 for your windows installation.

    One final recomendation is a to have a your infomation backedup. In the event that your storage drive is being filled with your storage needs, you may need another drive devoted for backup. In this case one more drive that is large enough to backup everything is not a bad idea.
  6. Only people who need this kind of harddrive speed is video editing. The rest of us just like faster components =P .

    Personnally I think everyone should be using raid 1 now. As he said you can get two 500gb drives for nothing! If you put that in raid 1 that means you dont have to worry about backing up 500gb of data. or when your data does die you just get another harddrive.

    There is no reason for getting raid 0. Harddrives fail fast enough and often enough. But I guess all the people using raid 0 here dont use their comps for anything important cept games which are only a quick installation away.
  7. Quote:
    Why do you guys buy raptor hard drives? Is there some special benefit in having them? I read that you guys usually get 2 of them and distribute files on both. Can someone explain the ideal setup for a good computer?
    Raptors Main advantage is it's 10,000 RPM speed. This cuts down on rotational latency. This means less "wait time" when you read and or write data to/from the disk. All other desktop hard drives use either a 7,200RPM platter speed, or some older/low-end ones use 5,400 RPM's. The 7200RPM drives are faster than the 5400 drives, and so forth.
  8. Quote:
    I have 2x74Gb Raptor in Raid 0 for my OS and related programs and as well as my games. Faster boot and game loading time.


    Yeah and if one dies you're screwed.

    Screwed? As if it's some huge problem to replace a HD and reload the OS + programs? No, in my book, screwed is when you lose something that can't be replaced. Chuck's usage of RAID0 for OS+Apps has very little risk as long as he has copies of the software. The odds of a two-drive RAID0 going down is double that of a single identical drive. For a drive like the Raptor, I wouldn't sweat it. Chuck's performance-oriented guy and I'd bet he'll build a new system before his array dies.
  9. There is no reason for getting raid 0. Harddrives fail fast enough and often enough. But I guess all the people using raid 0 here dont use their comps for anything important cept games which are only a quick installation away.

    Since the old days of pata5400 drives I use raid and never had problems with it. Now HDs are much better and safer, but still backup is important and I save mine in dual layer media. I never had the need of large files stored since I use my pc at home for renders and so.
  10. Quote:
    I have 2x74Gb Raptor in Raid 0 for my OS and related programs and as well as my games. Faster boot and game loading time.

    hmmm yeah, but how much is faster? a couple seconds? games load instantaneously?
    i have this doubt, if the extra price you pay for a raptor justify a couple seconds less in boot or loading times
  11. Quote:
    I have 2x74Gb Raptor in Raid 0 for my OS and related programs and as well as my games. Faster boot and game loading time.

    hmmm yeah, but how much is faster? a couple seconds? games load instantaneously?

    Plenty of benchmarks are available on Toms, Anandtech, etc., if you need quantitative satisfaction.

    Quote:
    i have this doubt, if the extra price you pay for a raptor justify a couple seconds less in boot or loading times


    That is YOUR value assessment. I therefore recommend that you do not buy Raptors and RAID them. To those of us that DO value the performance advantage (and especially to those that have a need for speed) are fortunate to be able to make such judgements for ourselves, unimpeded by the ramblings of jap0nes.
  12. Quote:
    Plenty of benchmarks are available on Toms, Anandtech, etc., if you need quantitative satisfaction.

    plenty of benchmarks show that in REAL LIFE APPLICATIONS, a raptor is just like 10 seconds faster to boot windows, or 15 seconds faster to load a game. I was asking Chuckhissle, not you, by the way, if he feels much of a difference on raptors. Also, benchmarks are made using high-end components, with fresh installs for example. I was asking him how it performs in real life usage.


    Quote:
    To those of us that DO value the performance advantage (and especially to those that have a need for speed) are fortunate to be able to make such judgements for ourselves, unimpeded by the ramblings of jap0nes.

    Excuse me? Did i make this question to you? No?
    Anyway, you're in part right. This is my value assessment, as saying that a raptor is worth is someone else's. The problem is that everybody who has, or is intending to buy a raptor says it is faster. It's obviously faster, but by how much? Nobody says that, they only say it's a 10k rpm and whatever, but what does that mean in real life?
    Benchmarks around show a huge advantage in synthetic benchmarks, but a tiny one in real life applications, that's why i asked Chuckhissle, not you, if it's really good.
  13. Well, as always with technology is the diminishing rate of return for your dollar the higher you go up the spending ladder...ummm or however that goes...

    I have two 74gb Raptors in RAID 0 and I can tell you that they are really fast. I can hardly stand to use anyone else's computer because it's just so dang slow in comparison (especially when I have to BOOT someone else's computer...) However, when I was just using one Raptor it was still really fast. When I upped to RAID 0 I noticed a an imrovement but whether or not it was worth the $175 would be up to the user. In my case, I'm always glad for increased performance and willing to pay for it.

    If you are on a tight budget I would still totally recommend either a 36gb or 74gb Raptor for OS and Apps/Games and you will notice a difference in your boot time, game loading time, and overall 'snappiness' of the computer.

    Check out some benchmarks that are out there and you'll see exactly the difference and then can determine if RAID 0 is worth the money to you.
  14. Getting raptors or getting raid 0 is a matter of preference I think so it probably can not be debated reallly. lol.

    Raid 0: Some see the extra money/time of raid 0 to be worth it. I do not see it to be worth it.

    raptor: some see the extra money worth it... i do not. Performance increase is not really worthwhile...

    Personally though I store lots of important files and need them... so raid 1.

    -------------

    p.s. And just for the record just because harddrive technology gets older does not mean they are more reliable. There is no way to make harddrives more reliable even if you manufacture the perfect harddrive it will break eventually because there is so many moving parts that are moving soo fast. I can't wait till harddrives become obsolete and it is all solid state storage.
  15. Quote:
    I can't wait till harddrives become obsolete and it is all solid state storage.


    I second that!
  16. Quote:
    Screwed? As if it's some huge problem to replace a HD and reload the OS + programs? No, in my book, screwed is when you lose something that can't be replaced. Chuck's usage of RAID0 for OS+Apps has very little risk as long as he has copies of the software. The odds of a two-drive RAID0 going down is double that of a single identical drive. For a drive like the Raptor, I wouldn't sweat it. Chuck's performance-oriented guy and I'd bet he'll build a new system before his array dies.


    Umm. Yes. It is. Your Windows license key is only good for one use with an OEM product. Sure you can get around it by backing up the OS install or saving the activation file elsewhere. Most people don't do this though. I'm not saying its a huge risk, I have a 320GB storage RAID0 array myself, but I would never run Windows on a RAID0. I can deal with loosing my data. But its a PITA to have my OS die too. Thats about a day to a day and a half to reinstall everything and get it all updated and what not.

    Oh and I don't know about you but I don't throw away my hard drives when I build a new system. They go into the new computer and are used for the same task usually. I have an 80GB that I've had in 3 different computers for my OS.

    As far as the guy who said you can get 500GB hard drives for nothing now. I wouldn't go that far. 500GB drives are $200-215. Thats not nothing to most of us. Its not a bad price, but not cheap. Now 250GB drives. Those are only $75-80 each now so getting two of them and doing RAID 1 would be pretty inexpensive and cost less than 1 500GB drive. Half the capacity but also less than half the price.
  17. Quote:
    I was asking Chuckhissle, not you, by the way, if he feels much of a difference on raptors.

    If you wanted to exclude others from possible commentary, then perhaps an email or PM would have been more effective. This is a forum where anyone can reply to any post. Your feeble attempts at censorship were a waste of time.
    Quote:
    Excuse me? Did i make this question to you? No?

    See above. You appear to have a poor understanding of forum function.
    Quote:
    Anyway, you're in part right. This is my value assessment, as saying that a raptor is worth is someone else's.

    Of course I'm right. No surprise there.
    Quote:
    The problem is that everybody who has, or is intending to buy a raptor says it is faster. It's obviously faster, but by how much? Nobody says that, they only say it's a 10k rpm and whatever, but what does that mean in real life?

    This is an incorrect statement. I have provided specific real world RAID0 Raptor info in other threads.
    Quote:
    that's why i asked Chuckhissle, not you, if it's really good.

    You need to learn the difference between an email and a forum. Regardless of how you may view yourself as a powerful censor, it don't work that way. Around here, you're just adept at proving your tendencies to post baseless opinions while attempting to bully and censor people. Don't waste your time trying to push me around. If you want to have a private conversation with Chuck, then got to PM or email and don't waste forum bandwidth.
  18. Quote:
    There is no way to make harddrives more reliable


    This ignores some significant advances made over the last decade - and development is ongoing, particularly for mobile devices.
  19. Quote:
    Screwed? As if it's some huge problem to replace a HD and reload the OS + programs? No, in my book, screwed is when you lose something that can't be replaced. Chuck's usage of RAID0 for OS+Apps has very little risk as long as he has copies of the software. The odds of a two-drive RAID0 going down is double that of a single identical drive. For a drive like the Raptor, I wouldn't sweat it. Chuck's performance-oriented guy and I'd bet he'll build a new system before his array dies.


    Umm. Yes. It is. Your Windows license key is only good for one use with an OEM product. Sure you can get around it by backing up the OS install or saving the activation file elsewhere. Most people don't do this though. I'm not saying its a huge risk, I have a 320GB storage RAID0 array myself, but I would never run Windows on a RAID0. I can deal with loosing my data. But its a PITA to have my OS die too. Thats about a day to a day and a half to reinstall everything and get it all updated and what not.

    Odd, I had to reinstall XP a month ago and had no problems as you refer to. I didn't have to use any smoke or mirrors, no tricky schemes. And it didn't take me a day and a half. It took about 3 hours, including Windows update and game loading. Maybe it was faster for me because I was loading onto RAID0 Raptors? Ha!
  20. For the cost and performance 2x74Gb is not really a good deal. I see your point well in this. Matter of fact I did think of it before I got this setup. But being new to it I did first of to try out and see the benifits from it. I do have faster boot and load times. Windows XP HE boot time about 20s and games up to 5-10seconds depending on the game loading. Was it worth it I would say somewhat but not really to justify the cost. But having to load faster is better nonetheless.

    :wink:
  21. Yup, very true, Fit is clueless, hehe, no pun intended.

    RAID 0 is fine with newer hd's, they rarely fail if treated properly, unless they are maxtors (current crop sucks), and there is a noticable speed increase in windows performance, load times maybe, maybe not, depends on the game.

    And the only time the oem xp license can't be used again, and I say can't with a grain of salt, is if the mb is replaced, I've dealt with MS on this issue numerous times.

    Replaced a MB on an HP that was out of warranty and HP wouldn't support it even though they wouldn't repair it, called MS and they said it couldn't be done with an oem license I'd have to pay for a new copy (yeah, that's smart), did it and told them to go f themselves, also told them that's why people enjoy bootlegging their software, the two guys I spoke with just kinda stammered and hung up.
  22. Just get two 150Gig HD, use one for your OS and Programs. Use the other for back-up, storage of your mp3, photos, etc.

    Nuff said.
  23. Quote:
    I have 2x74Gb Raptor in Raid 0 for my OS and related programs and as well as my games. Faster boot and game loading time.


    Yeah and if one dies you're screwed.


    I have two 74GB Raptors but only because I bought them for $75 each. I wouldn't pay $150 for 74GB of space. Not when I can get 500GB (2x250) for the same price now.


    How many times does somebody have to point out the pitfalls of RAID 0. In the years I have had a computer, not counting Commodore and those others, but a real computer, I have not had one hard drive go bad on me. The RAID 0 warning about data security is completely lost on me, has no meaning. Further, it is no problem for me to reinstall the OS and programs and get going again if a HD ever did fail on me.

    hball
  24. Quote:
    This ignores some significant advances made over the last decade - and development is ongoing, particularly for mobile devices.


    I know that mobile devices stop spinning harddrives when the accelerometors detect movement of the laptop, but other than that please elucidate me about technology that makes harddrives less prone to destroying themselves!

    (more cache would mean less time spinning the drive so you could argue that is an improvement... umm... the new flash + harddrives essentially do this. but i cant think of anything else... they still self destruct fairly often.)
  25. Quote:
    I was asking Chuckhissle, not you, by the way, if he feels much of a difference on raptors.

    If you wanted to exclude others from possible commentary, then perhaps an email or PM would have been more effective. This is a forum where anyone can reply to any post. Your feeble attempts at censorship were a waste of time.
    Quote:
    Excuse me? Did i make this question to you? No?

    See above. You appear to have a poor understanding of forum function.
    Quote:
    Anyway, you're in part right. This is my value assessment, as saying that a raptor is worth is someone else's.

    Of course I'm right. No surprise there.
    Quote:
    The problem is that everybody who has, or is intending to buy a raptor says it is faster. It's obviously faster, but by how much? Nobody says that, they only say it's a 10k rpm and whatever, but what does that mean in real life?

    This is an incorrect statement. I have provided specific real world RAID0 Raptor info in other threads.
    Quote:
    that's why i asked Chuckhissle, not you, if it's really good.

    You need to learn the difference between an email and a forum. Regardless of how you may view yourself as a powerful censor, it don't work that way. Around here, you're just adept at proving your tendencies to post baseless opinions while attempting to bully and censor people. Don't waste your time trying to push me around. If you want to have a private conversation with Chuck, then got to PM or email and don't waste forum bandwidth.
    do you have any raptor, by the way?
    until now, at this thread, i havent seen you provide any effective answer to the topic question, which is: why do you have raptor hds?
    So, instead of trying to offend me, why dont you try to contribute a little bit? If you cant, just sit and read instead of trying to offend me
  26. Quote:
    This ignores some significant advances made over the last decade - and development is ongoing, particularly for mobile devices.


    I know that mobile devices stop spinning harddrives when the accelerometors detect movement of the laptop, but other than that please elucidate me about technology that makes harddrives less prone to destroying themselves!

    One advancement is flatter platters. Reduced head crashes.

    Another: lighter and more responsive armatures that heads are mounted on. Reduced head crashes.

    Another: improved bearing technology. Less platter wobble = (you guessed it) less head crashes.
  27. Quote:
    do you have any raptor, by the way?


    Three 74s one 150.

    Quote:
    until now, at this thread, i havent seen you provide any effective answer to the topic question, which is: why do you have raptor hds?


    Thread drift, dude. I can address any aspect of the thread that I choose to. My obligations are not defined by you, so FO.

    Quote:
    So, instead of trying to offend me, why dont you try to contribute a little bit?


    Your reading comprehension skills are extremely lacking. You are in need of an extremely powerful laxative.

    Quote:
    If you cant, just sit and read instead of trying to offend me


    I'm not trying to ofend you, although I do find your attitude extremely offensive. Quit trying to censor me or STFU.
  28. Quote:
    I'm not trying to ofend you, although I do find your attitude extremely offensive

    cough cough
    look who's talking...
    that's the second topic you try come with personal attacks against me for no reason
  29. when i bought my first 36 GB raptor within a couple weeks after they were introduced, browsing around frys electronics, i initially hadnt even read about them... saw that it was 10K rpm, and had 8MB of cache, for $150... now, i couldve gone for a 200 GB hard drive for that price, that was also sitting nearby, my step dad who was also with me couldnt see the reason to getting a hard drive that small, especially when there were much larger hard drives for cheaper, but seeing as how i wasnt starved for storage capacity or anything, never having taken up even 40 GBs before on any windows installation... i decided it was worth a try to see how much of a benefit there really was, instead of getting capacity i was never going to use... it definetly seemed faster, whether i had been imagining it or not, i dunno... so i went and bought another a couple days later, to pair in raid 0... the benefit of 2 of them in raid 0 was not evident until i upgraded to my current set up from socket 462, i guess something having to do with how the cpu manages data... the benefit then was VERY obvious, the 10000 RPM hard drives that i had initially thought were a waste to pair in raid 0, shined though then... a couple years after having purchased my first 2, i purchased 2 more to add into raid 0... simply for the speed... ...yeah, windows does install in about 9 minutes, everything just installs faster, runs faster, loads smoother... even the slowest raptor, the 36 GB raptor... is still wicked fast... ...whether its worth it or not to have a fast hard drive over large capacity... well, thats up to the individual... failure in raid 0?... i havent really heard of any raptors failing really in raid, a few of my friends have them too... BUT, a great majority of the other IDE hard drives weve had, have had numerous failures at one time or another... definetly a higher rate of failure... compared to any of the raptors ive seen in use... but yeah, thats just been my experience using raptors... also, im not sure, and i THINK i read this somewhere, but i think raptors are scsi based hard drives, with a sata interface... which would explain their reliability, and price... but, i could be wrong, wouldnt doubt it if i am.
  30. Quote:
    I'm not trying to ofend you, although I do find your attitude extremely offensive

    cough cough
    look who's talking...
    that's the second topic you try come with personal attacks against me for no reason

    OK, listenup here: You are the one that tried to conduct a personal conversation with Chuck on the forum. Remember how you didn't want me to reply? I can go cut and past your inane comments if you'd like but it's right in this thread in case your memory sucks as bad as your respect for personal libetries. So don't preach about personal attacks, numbnuts. And shove your "no reason" BS where the sun don't shine - assuming you can move your head farther up to make room.
  31. As for failure rates. I have my data and system drive on RAID 1 arrays because I had one drive fail on me this year and three in the past. As far as Raptors go, I don't know anyone who has had one fail but I wouldn't count on them as a single drive or in RAID 0 for my data. As far as OS drives go if you can go without the machine for a week or two (however long it will take to get your warranty replacement and then find a few hours to reinstall everything) you can use single or RAID 0 for system drives.

    @japOnes:

    Clue69less has been right about your behavior, although his last couple replies have gotten a bit over the line. I do not blame him though as you have taken a very negative and fairly personal stance here and refused to either take responsiblity for where you went wrong or simply let the subject go (I present this second option because I suspect that Clue69less would have left it alone and it would not requier you to be a big enough person to admit your mistake). Please let the subject drop, take the initial advice to heart and spare yourself from having similar arguments in the future, that will also spare the rest of us from having to read through them to get the usefull information that people like Clue69less put in there (as they are nor willing to completely waste our time).
  32. yeah... as long as you have your data backed up on a seperate storage device, reinstalling is fairly painless, already having all the drivers and software you need ready in reserve... i wouldnt use a solo drive for my essential data (or raid 0)... thats all stored on an external drive, and then backed up occasionally over a lan; backing up vital data on a regular basis is absolutely essential... scheduling a back up task even
  33. Quote:
    Yeah and if one dies you're screwed.


    I guess all you guys saying if one dies you are screwed have never heard of backups. It'd be the same process as what you would do with single drive anyway.

    Replace busted drive, restore from backup.

    Sounds real hard.

    By the way, if running RAID 1 keeps you from making real backups, you may one day be in for a big suprise. It's not impossible for 2 drives to go out at once. Case in point, IBM Deskstar (aka Deathstar) drives had a huge fail rate if not kept at a nice cool temp.

    John
  34. Quote:
    @japOnes:

    Clue69less has been right about your behavior, although his last couple replies have gotten a bit over the line. I do not blame him though as you have taken a very negative and fairly personal stance here and refused to either take responsiblity for where you went wrong or simply let the subject go (I present this second option because I suspect that Clue69less would have left it alone and it would not requier you to be a big enough person to admit your mistake). Please let the subject drop, take the initial advice to heart and spare yourself from having similar arguments in the future, that will also spare the rest of us from having to read through them to get the usefull information that people like Clue69less put in there (as they are nor willing to completely waste our time).

    i just asked chuck if the drives are worth the money, that's all. Am i wrong for doing that? Then Clue69less came with an offensive attitude, just like he did in another thread (you probably havent seen it), for no reason. He came personally attacking me instead of pointing his argument, so i guess i'm not the wrong person in here.
    I usually take your advice, and i also dislike when things like this happen. But this is the second thread that went on personal attacks because Clue69less started. I could let it go, but i dont like people telling wrong things about me in a public place.

    I dont know if you've read well, but it was Clue69less who started sh*tting on me just because i made a question...
  35. Personnally I think everyone should be using raid 1 now. As he said you can get two 500gb drives for nothing! If you put that in raid 1 that means you dont have to worry about backing up 500gb of data. or when your data does die you just get another harddrive.

    Not so fast there boyo!

    No Need for Backups? ARE YOU POSITIVELY INSANE?

    Ha - we'll laugh at you when your PC is stolen, or soem malicious software wipes out some data.

    No - a RAID array (even RAID1) can NOT be considered to be "Backup". RAID1 is merely "Failover protection" so that in the event of an HDD failure you can continue working, and rebuild the array later.

    A Backup is a hard drive (or tape, etc.) which is stored off the premises, and a new copy made once a month.

    Nothing else can be considered even remotely reliable. If your house burns down, and your backup is in the house, then it was NOT a backup - merely a local copy of your data.
  36. Quote:
    Nothing else can be considered even remotely reliable. If your house burns down, and your backup is in the house, then it was NOT a backup - merely a local copy of your data.


    ...hmm... could put your back up media in a fireproof safe maybe... although, if your house burns down... it shouldve been stored in raid as well i think, lol
  37. Quote:
    i just asked chuck if the drives are worth the money, that's all. Am i wrong for doing that?


    Yes, you are on two fronts. As I have already clearly explained, this FORUM is not your personal email account. If you want to speak only to Chuck, then PM or email him. Why you can't understand that is beyond me. Secondly, your first post to this thread did not specify Chuck as the only person that could respond (not that such a ploy would have worked except to point out your ignorance). Here 'tis:

    "hmmm yeah, but how much is faster? a couple seconds? games load instantaneously? i have this doubt, if the extra price you pay for a raptor justify a couple seconds less in boot or loading times"

    I don't take you very seriously when you write a statement as blatantly ignorant as: "games load instantaneously?". If you've ever played a modern game then you know they won't load instantaneously even if you had a 4-drive RAID0 array with 15K RPM SCSI drives. And quit acting so naive - your supposed question clearly displays your bias.

    Quote:
    Then Clue69less came with an offensive attitude, just like he did in another thread (you probably havent seen it), for no reason.


    You're a fricken crybaby - did anyone ever tell you that? I could easily point out the multitude of threads where you have been rude to numerous people but instead I'll just say again: This is a FORUM. Don't post here and expect to specify or restrict to a list the people allowed to reply. That's not the way a FORUM works, dude.

    Quote:
    But this is the second thread that went on personal attacks because Clue69less started. I could let it go, but i dont like people telling wrong things about me in a public place.


    Keep whining. Better mop up those tears before they short out your CPU.

    Quote:
    I dont know if you've read well, but it was Clue69less who started sh*tting on me just because i made a question...


    Oh, it was SUCH a valuable question! The world will not be the same until it is answered the WAY you want it answered, WHEN you want it answered and by the SPECIFIC person that you wish to answer it. Google up "freedom of speech", "forum" and "censor", loser.

    I'm done replying to you on this thread but let me be clear - don't try to play censor on this forum. So there you have it - a free shot. Go for it and we'll see if you've learned anything by this fabulous waste of time. I won't hold my breath.
  38. No need for this, CPU is limiting factor in video processing: if you have 2 normal HD (not raptors) in RAID0 you'll never have bottlenecks.
    Who absolutely needs raptors is who works with DB application: with mysql on an AMD64 machine you will still have bottlenecks also with a RAID0 2xSCSI 15k, so raptor is a good compromise for developers (but not for production servers fo course).
  39. Quote:
    Raptors Main advantage is it's 10,000 RPM speed


    The main advantage is super-good mechanics and superb linear motor drivers: remember they were the best server class HD only 2 years ago when they were sold with SCSI intf before WD switched to high end desktop (for earnings reasons).
    This permits average track seek times half the time of normal HD. And track seek time isn't affected by rotational latency: both combined sums into the "access time".
  40. I wondered if someone was going to mention this, raptors are essentialy consumer branded scsi drives with a sata interface. Much better reliability and durabilty then normal consumer hd's. SCSI drives were made for 24/7 operation, they inherantly have longer lifes, and are usually noisier :D
  41. off topic:
    I had to read your name twice.
    It looked like Gayman42... :lol:
  42. okay, i'd better not contradict crazy people. They may become aggressive (like you). So, you *cough cough* you were always right *cough*
  43. Quote:
    okay, i'd better not contradict crazy people. They may become aggressive (like you). So, you *cough cough* you were always right *cough*
    You should get the cough looked at . Sounds bad. :?
  44. Quote:
    okay, i'd better not contradict crazy people. They may become aggressive (like you). So, you *cough cough* you were always right *cough*
    You should get the cough looked at . Sounds bad. :?
    I know... But that's nothing compared to what i have been called until now
  45. Quote:
    No need for this, CPU is limiting factor in video processing: if you have 2 normal HD (not raptors) in RAID0 you'll never have bottlenecks.
    Who absolutely needs raptors is who works with DB application: with mysql on an AMD64 machine you will still have bottlenecks also with a RAID0 2xSCSI 15k, so raptor is a good compromise for developers (but not for production servers fo course).

    i agree with you. Raptors 10k rpm gives advantage in high i/o environments, like a database for example. For sustained transfer rates it performs the same as a 7200 rpm. In real life applications for a desktop user it only gives a small advantage over 7200rpm drives.
  46. I recently upgraded from a Barracuda 7200.7 striped RAID to two 150GB Raptors.

    The performance is measurably/visibly different. You really feel everything opening faster. Of course, basic activities aren't going to benefit.

    I took some benchmarks of both RAIDs using PC Wizard and the results were mind-blowing.

    I do believe they are seriously over priced though... but this is how the industry works. They're a premium luxury for enthusiasts or for those who want to remove all possible bottlenecks that they can with the currently available technology.
  47. Quote:

    No - a RAID array (even RAID1) can NOT be considered to be "Backup". RAID1 is merely "Failover protection" so that in the event of an HDD failure you can continue working, and rebuild the array later.

    A Backup is a hard drive (or tape, etc.) which is stored off the premises, and a new copy made once a month.

    Nothing else can be considered even remotely reliable. If your house burns down, and your backup is in the house, then it was NOT a backup - merely a local copy of your data.


    very true lol. i didn't think of that lol. and now the issue of backup gets more complex haha. :twisted: damn it all. :twisted:


    I still think harddrives are cheap enough and big enough to justify everyone doing raid 1 though. because they are known to be super unreliable.
  48. Next time folks be a little more mature and not garble up the topic with crap (staring at Japones)... I think Japones was the instigator here personally. And I think aragorn/Clue69less were right in what they said.
Ask a new question

Read More

Computer Hard Drives Raptor Storage