Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Building a gaming pc, is 10,000rpm worth it?

Tags:
  • Hard Drives
  • Gaming
  • Performance
  • Storage
  • Product
Last response: in Storage
Share
March 10, 2007 9:36:57 PM

I'm building a gaming rig, and am just wondering if a 10,000rpm hard-drive's performance is really worth the extra money/loss of space.
Will the quicker access speeds be that noticeble when i'm gaming?
Also I can see myself easily filling a 74GB HD, so i'd opt for the 150GB counterpart.

- dave

More about : building gaming 000rpm worth

a b G Storage
March 11, 2007 12:28:53 AM

There isn't really any point. Grab yourself a few of these . Put 2 in RAID 0, and leave a third drive independent for storing install files and other data you can't afford to lose (because the failure rate effectively doubles in RAID 0. If either drive dies in the array, all of the data is lost.)
March 11, 2007 1:48:21 AM

I have one of the 7200.10 drives.... It is a fantastic drive and is damn close to 10k raptor specs.
Related resources
March 11, 2007 1:55:30 AM

Updated sig 8)
March 11, 2007 3:45:19 AM

Raptor 10K is well worth it. I have had a few. BUT not for games.

you will notice with the raptor, windows loads faster, appz load faster. general everyday appz are improved alot.

just games dont rely too much on HD speed.
March 11, 2007 4:27:19 AM

You've asked the question that many wonder about, but few do anything about. I bought a 150 gig Raptor when I saw a good sale and its going into my next gaming machine. Don't know if I'll ever do something like that again, but if I didn't, then I'd always wonder if it would have been worthwhile. Oh yes, I'll have a second, 7200 rpm drive for data installed as well.
March 11, 2007 6:48:29 AM

well, raptors are no doubt faster than any other current 7200rpm hdd, especially the newest 3 adfd raptors, 36GB, 74GB, 150GB (the access times are certainly faster, 8ms to 16ms)... but, real world difference between the two rpms isnt much at all, to be honest, and capacity is definetly smaller... but, if youre only going for top consumer single hdd performance, and capacity doesnt matter too much, considering the cost per gigabyte, then look no further than a raptor.
March 11, 2007 7:56:33 AM

you're right. I have the 74Gb for windows and apps only. Xp boots in under 35 seconds and apps load way faster than before. I have a large WD caviar for storage only... music, movies, backups software, pictures etc.
Games like CS:S load faster and I did notice faster loadtimes in BF2. Aps like photoshop load in under 5 seconds from a cold start(with 2gb ram).
Raptors are LOUD and a lil Hot but FAST.
March 11, 2007 6:49:46 PM

check this out. Here is HDTAC for my Segate Baracuda 320gb 7200.10 perpendicular drive. IDE version...



Edit: My drive is 95% full :D 
March 11, 2007 7:53:11 PM

A lot of you seem to be confused by all the marketing/stuff that people spout without knowing what they're saying.

Does the Raptor improve game performance? Only load times. This is because fast sequential reads and writes speed up the transfer of items from the HD to the RAM. It's not really worth the money with this in mind, since loading is a minor aspect, and the performance increase is marginal.

Does the Raptor improve general system performance? YES. Apart from needing fast reads and writes, Windows does LOADS of small operations in the background, which are greatly sped up because the Raptor has far quicker access times. That's why installing your OS on a SCSI 10K/15K drive also makes it greatly more responsive than a 7200rpm drive.

I hope that clears things up for you. Suggestion - get a 36/74GB Raptor for your OS and apps. For games, get another Raptor, or the Seagate people mentioned depending on your budget and needs.
March 11, 2007 8:21:55 PM

Quote:

I hope that clears things up for you. Suggestion - get a 36/74GB Raptor for your OS and apps. For games, get another Raptor, or the Seagate people mentioned depending on your budget and needs.


I don't know about anybody else, but I wasn't confused or needed anything cleared up. I'm starting my next build and it has a Raptor 150 gig for the OS and apps and a WD 320 for data, etc.
March 11, 2007 8:30:29 PM

I'm waiting for the CompUSA near me to put in some hefty %savings b4 they close. I went there this weekend, and even with a 30% off, the HDD shelf was full.
I would get a raptor from there if they have one left, with like say, at least a 50% off deal.
March 11, 2007 8:44:59 PM

What WD drive? I chose the Seagate because of the notch (maybe small) above the other drives... And its a good gb:$ ratio... 3.5gb/$1 I think at newegg.com

320gb Seagate $89.99 3.5gb:$1
160GB? per platter
5 year warranty

150gb raptor $209.99 .72gb:$1
72% greater spindle speed and 3x faster seek time
75? gb per platter
3 year warranty

In terms of gb/$, the raptor costs 4.86 times the Seagate per GB. I dont think its worth it compared to the Seagate. But, If you have the money, its a nice item to have.

(Newegg prices and this post is a little subjective)
March 11, 2007 8:48:27 PM

I don't see why you took that so personally Sailer, I didn't mention you by name nor did I say that everyone was confused, just a lot of the posters. A lot of them seem to think that sequential reads and writes are what makes a drive fast or not, when it's far from the whole picture that's all.
March 11, 2007 9:04:22 PM

Quote:
I don't see why you took that so personally Sailer, I didn't mention you by name nor did I say that everyone was confused, just a lot of the posters. A lot of them seem to think that sequential reads and writes are what makes a drive fast or not, when it's far from the whole picture that's all.


Perhaps I should apologize. Its been a bad morning for me and my nerves are a bit on edge. I just wanted to make sure it was understood that I was not part of the uninformed.
March 11, 2007 9:12:12 PM

Quote:
I don't see why you took that so personally Sailer, I didn't mention you by name nor did I say that everyone was confused, just a lot of the posters. A lot of them seem to think that sequential reads and writes are what makes a drive fast or not, when it's far from the whole picture that's all.


Perhaps I should apologize. Its been a bad morning for me and my nerves are a bit on edge. I just wanted to make sure it was understood that I was not part of the uninformed.

No problem, we all have bad days! And I'm glad I'm not the only one who actually understands the benefit of Raptors, cause then it might seem like I'm one nutjob who is saying something contrary to the norm hehe...

I'm running my OS on a 15K SCSI myself now, but I really want to move over to a Raptor. I get the distinct feeling that by needing to use a PCI card (whether it be for RAID or SCSI) gives it an IRQ that is less important than most onboard devices, so using onboard might be preferable. I realise it's totally off-topic, excuse the tangent.
March 11, 2007 9:19:40 PM

My above post doesnt mean that I stand against the raptor... I want one badly, but I cant justify the costs if money is tight. Think of the drive as and enthusiast device. Meant for the high end regardless of cost. But in that respect, there are other alternatives.
March 11, 2007 10:17:53 PM



Like the Raptor, the SCSI drive would improve general system performance far more than the effect it would have on games. But of course not only are the SCSI drives more expensive themselves, unless you have an enterprise-class board with onboard SCSI you'd need to spend even more on the addon card... Trust me I tried, and it's not worth it.
March 11, 2007 10:24:09 PM

See how small those platters are? At what point does we lose the effect of spindle speed at the cost of a smaller platter diameter?

Here in a few years, I dont think spindle speed will matter much. New buffer tech will be awesome.
March 11, 2007 11:23:08 PM



Like the Raptor, the SCSI drive would improve general system performance far more than the effect it would have on games. But of course not only are the SCSI drives more expensive themselves, unless you have an enterprise-class board with onboard SCSI you'd need to spend even more on the addon card... Trust me I tried, and it's not worth it.

I just moved over to SCSI 15K and it screams in Windows, even faster than my Raptor, which was noticeably faster than my old 7200 drive. Windows loads faster, games load faster and as has been mentioned all those little file accesses just happen a lot quicker.

My set up is cheap too - an old PCI U160 card, cable, adaptor and new Fujitsu 73GB MAX3073NC drive came in at less than a 74GB Raptor.

So SCSI can be good value if you shop around (thanks ebay!).

But anyone thinking of moving to Raptors or SCSI had better be prepared for a loud seek noise - they sound like a couple of coffee grinders under the desk :) 
March 11, 2007 11:29:34 PM



Like the Raptor, the SCSI drive would improve general system performance far more than the effect it would have on games. But of course not only are the SCSI drives more expensive themselves, unless you have an enterprise-class board with onboard SCSI you'd need to spend even more on the addon card... Trust me I tried, and it's not worth it.

I just moved over to SCSI 15K and it screams in Windows, even faster than my Raptor, which was noticeably faster than my old 7200 drive. Windows loads faster, games load faster and as has been mentioned all those little file accesses just happen a lot quicker.

My set up is cheap too - an old PCI U160 card, cable, adaptor and new Fujitsu 73GB MAX3073NC drive came in at less than a 74GB Raptor.

So SCSI can be good value if you shop around (thanks ebay!).

But anyone thinking of moving to Raptors or SCSI had better be prepared for a loud seek noise - they sound like a couple of coffee grinders under the desk :) 

Haha, I got my Adaptec 29160 SCSI card from ebay too, and actually my Cheetah drive too. However, I installed Windows from scratch on it, and I installed Windows from scratch on my bro-in-law's PC which had a Raptor, and his was most definitely not in any noticeable way slower than mine. Mind you, both blow 7200rpm out of the water completely.

As for the seek noise, my Seagate Cheetah is WAY louder than the Raptor, dont know about your newer Fujitsu (mine was new, like 3 years ago when I got it!)
March 12, 2007 12:26:45 AM

I love my Raptor, Windows loads noticebly faster (not much though) and ever since I got it I've always made it to a jet/chopper in BF2 before anyone else is on the server and can fly over to enemy uncap just as they all spawn hehehehe. I keep my OS, Apps, and the games in which my load times count (Steam, BF2, BF2142). All my other games, music and video are on my 250g it's the way to go.
March 12, 2007 12:40:50 AM

I actually wonder if loading something like BF from the same Raptor that has Windows on it is faster or slower than doing so from a separate drive from Windows.

Separating the Windows and game install definitely improves performance, but I wonder what the trade-off of going to a normal drive from the Raptor is in comparison to running both off a faster drive.
March 12, 2007 9:15:45 AM

Quote:
Haha, I got my Adaptec 29160 SCSI card from ebay too, and actually my Cheetah drive too. However, I installed Windows from scratch on it, and I installed Windows from scratch on my bro-in-law's PC which had a Raptor, and his was most definitely not in any noticeable way slower than mine. Mind you, both blow 7200rpm out of the water completely.

As for the seek noise, my Seagate Cheetah is WAY louder than the Raptor, dont know about your newer Fujitsu (mine was new, like 3 years ago when I got it!)


Actually I think the Raptor is louder - it's a lower pitch noise (surprised me that). Both have negligent idle noise though to my ears. But the Fujitsu is new and the Raptor is a couple of years old so that might be a factor.

Most SCSI 15K ranges were refreshed a couple of years back (Maxtor Atlas II, Seagate Cheetah 15K.4, Fujitsu MAU) with Fluid Dynamic Bearings and increased platter density, so this generation is quite a lot faster as well as quieter.

However, the Raptor is certainly an excellent drive - it's optimised for the desktop, is less hassle than SCSI, generates less heat, uses less energy, is usually cheaper, and is way faster than 7200 SATA drives - I just wish they'd make a 15K version :) 
March 12, 2007 3:38:27 PM

It would be nice to see a perpendicular 15k drive... 160gb platters would be sweet 8)
March 12, 2007 6:51:56 PM

Seagate launched their 15K.5 late last year with perpendicular technology - only 73GB platters, but maximum capacity of 300GB - not bad, but a tad expensive at $600 :)  Didn't increase their speed much though, which is a shame.

BTW - interesting article just gone up on Toms about 2 cheap SATAs in RAID 0 vs the Raptor - maybe they'll bring those Raptors down in price now?
March 12, 2007 7:41:05 PM

Not really worth it, unless you can't wait that extra 1-2 sec while it loads the next stage - and you can tolerate the noise it generates when it is loading.

Grab yourself some Barracudas 7200.10 RPM w/ 16MB Cache and you won't be dissappointed and or RAID 0/5/10 them for comparable speed.
March 12, 2007 7:42:03 PM

The raptor is indeed a screamin' HD with out a doubt.
If you are building a gaming a system the raptor is a must have.
the 150gb is the one to look for in this case.
If you have extra $$$ go for 2x 150gb raptors and use raid 0
March 14, 2007 1:03:27 AM

I can only imagine two 15k rpm drives in raid 0 :p  .
!