Raptor or Raid...

Hi All,

I've seen the latest article about using a couple of cheaper HDs to achieve a similar pace to a Raptor and I'm pretty convinced, but I've just got a couple of questions:

- Am a really better with a Raid 0 set up (I'm not fussed about security - I do my backups!)
- What drives should I be looking at? I want the fastest I can find (outside the raptors!)

I'm looking at the HGST T7250Ks but they've only got 8Mb cache and I saw this drive and thought it looked pretty good but don't know much about it. Anyone got any experience of it?

I'm planning to use the on-board Mobo Raid (I've got an ABIT KN8 with an AMD 4400).

What does everyone think :wink: ?

13 answers Last reply
More about raptor raid
  1. You may be considereding RAID with two cheap HD's, but for this price, I would consider one of these and call it a day.

  2. i was about ready to instead recommend the 74GB ADFD raptor for $140-$150 (same speed as the 150GB ADFD)... but for $170, the 150GB ADFD definetly seems the way to go... or you could even go for the 36GB ADFD for about $100 (again, the same speed as the 150GB ADFD) but the usable capacity may be smaller than you would care for by itself, but for an OS hdd, you really cant beat a raptor either way (raptors certainly make for a more responsive system than any 7200 will offer)... or you could raid 0 2*36GB ADFDs for about the same price as a single 150GB ADFD... which gives you the best of both worlds, raid 0 raptor performance, at a still feasible price (and a more bearable capacity as well)

    though even going with raid 0, dont expect astonishing results above a single hdd for most things

    outside of current raptors though, most current 7200 hdds offer roughly similar performance, the biggest advantages they have are larger total capacity, less noise on average, and a lower temperature (excellent for use as storage hdds)... the seagate 7200.10 320GB PMR 7200 sata hdd is a pretty decent 7200, its about $80-90 USD (i think that might have been the one you linked to, maybe)

    here you go: http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html?modelx=33&model1=117&model2=676&chart=34
  3. hell - ive tried raid 0 - and ive tried a raptor 150gig - the raid could messup dependent on certain things ie

    1) your mood
    2) the pc's mood
    3) the hdd's mood
    4) if you move it around a lot

    so id just stick to the one raptor IMHO its just safer unless you dont mind losing your data when the raid gives you problems - and yu really want two big drives acting as one for a theoretical gain

    im currently runnning a ratorX as my O/S drive and ive got three 320gig drives for storage which are not plugged in permanently into the rig - i just plug them in whenever i need them

    i dont keep anything important on the O/S drive ie nothing i cant walk away from withi a 2 minute decision - so if i need to format if i get any spyware or virus - its not too painful to lose the data - and basically that system works a charm - also just to prevent O/S clutter i format every three months or so - just to keep things working snappy

    the raid made the pc boot a bit faster - but that was about it - that was only increase i noticed - other than that it didnt do diddly squat that you could notice or really feel "wow my pc is really faster now that ive gone raid" - that just didnt happen it wasnt anything that you could notice
  4. Thanks for all your replies.

    I'm swinging back towards the Raptors now :roll: - I'm thinking about the 74Gb ones in a Raid 0 format.

    I see your point about the 150s, but I'm in the UK, and EVERYTHING costs more, so the 74s are available for about $185, whereas the 150s are a whopping $280.

    I'm also pretty comfortable with Raid and I've no intention of moving stuff around too much. I've got a seagate 250Gb disk which will serve as a backup and somewhere for less speed requiring stuff.

    My last question is : Is it worth it with my current set up - will I see the speed increase?

    (x2 4400, 2Gb Corsair, 7900Gt)

    Cheers again,
  5. Quote:
    This subject has been BEATEN TO DEATH :!: Here are the links

    Not so, I have already viewed these topics and didn't feel my questions had been answered.
  6. Quote:
    This subject has been BEATEN TO DEATH :!: Here are the links

    Not so, I have already viewed these topics and didn't feel my questions had been answered.
    Question #1 was most certainly answered about %50 pro %50 con, give or take.
    Question #2 http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html
    Edit: one more resource for you http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/03/12/cheap_raid_ravages_wd_raptor/

    Anything else :?:
  7. I accept that Q1 was always going to end up people giving their opinions. Fair enough. The article you referred to was what piqued my interest in the options though.

    I checked the other link and the drives I'm looking for were not covered. I thought here would be a good place to ask. I appreciate it's frowned upon to not do your research prior to posting, but in this case, I have.
  8. Touche. You are probably going to find similar remarks in this thread, if you even get many responses. But who knows, you might get lucky.
  9. i guess all i can say really is, raptors by themselves will be the fastest single hdd non scsi solution (and even raptors are about on par with 10k scsi hdds; using smaller 2.5" platters to allow for higher rpms, similar capacity platters as a result too, up until they start using PMR to increase capacity per platter, whenever that might be, consequently increasing STRs as a result too... right now its just physically not possible without PMR (or reducing the rpms), which is why you dont see larger non PMR platters on scsi hdds or raptors), but raptors are definetly more tuned for single user environments now too, i believe also... you may never see PMR on scsi based hdds though (or raptors), just wait and see i guess

    the only way im suspecting youre going to see a very noticable speed increase for everyday things, using 7200rpm raid over a single raptor, is if you invest in a seperate dedicated hardware based raid controller, and theyre not cheap either (they have their own integrated logic chips for handling I/O requests, dedicated memory, and other features i believe)... superfly pointed out hes going to run his tests with an areca arc1210 pcie sata raid controller ($320 usd, which is the cheapest areca newegg has), and then compare that to onboard...

    without a hardware based raid controller, going with raid 0 isnt going to offer much of a performance boost (synthetic benchmarks aside), synthetic benchmarks usually dont translate over to realworld usage very well though either... and thus without a decent controller, raid 0 has kinda limited itself to mostly just increased STRs... video audio editing, large file transfers, and faster windows boot times (due to increased, yet not intelligently managed, I/O performance)

    to make a very weak (but still relative) comparison, a single raptor can be equated more to a raid 0 array of 2*7200 rpm hdds; much higher I/O transfers (smoother gameplay as a result), more heat generated, more noise when seeking, higher STRs... the downside is that your access times still take twice as long using a 7200 instead of a raptor (7-8ms raptor compared to 14-16ms 7200, due to the slower rpms), so it still takes longer to locate files, and your still unlikely chance of failure is theoretically doubled

    all in all though, without a dedicated hardware raid controller, i cant see using raid 0 as being a very worthwhile thing (this coming from 4*36GB GD raptors in raid 0 with onboard software based raid myself, and i saw more of a performance boost just going with a single 74GB ADFD instead later on, for the reasons listed)... software based onboard raid 0 isnt able to intelligently organize I/O requests on its own, it relies on the cpu to do that... which is also why raid 5 performance typically sucks with onboard (cpu overhead due to managing parity)... a dedicated hardware controller handles everything like that on its own

    anyhow, yeah... the smarter decision (i would believe) is just to go with a faster single hdd, and just bypass the complications of using raid 0 altogether, and you may just see more performance with a single hdd than you would see with raid 0 anyhow (unless your specific use really shows some benefit from it)... that goes against the common theme of people praising raid 0, but it is heavily based on the performance of the controller used too.

    and a raptor has a 5 year warranty, which may or may not be worth it to you
  10. Thanks for all the replies.

    I don't think I'm in the market for a separate raid controller looking at the prices (esp in the UK!). However, after reading around the subject and thanks to the replies in this thread, I've decided to get a couple of 74Gb raptors and be done with it :oops:

    That way, I'll satisfy my desire to get some raid into my machine and also get the best performance I can from all standpoints! Might get a little noisy (and cost more than I anticipated), but I can live with that.

    Thanks again everyone.

  11. I've got a single Raptor and it isn't that loud. If you have a decent case with rubber grommets for the hard drive then it won't be too loud. Make sure that you check the Raptors to ensure that AAM isn't turned on. I don't know if this can be done in RAID so I would check before you start. Here is a link as to why.

    Good luck
  12. Thanks Zorg, appreciate the tip there :wink:

    (now where's my credit card...)
Ask a new question

Read More

Hard Drives NAS / RAID Raptor Storage