Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

7.200 rpm vs 10.000 rpm in real life

Last response: in Storage
Share
April 24, 2007 1:38:44 PM

Hi!

Getting a new computer together and am a bit fuzzy about going for a cheap 7.200rpm drive or a expensive 10.000rpm drive for my WIndows Vista to run on.

Is there a remarkable difference in real life speed between the two?
April 24, 2007 1:51:21 PM

Thanks for the link - but as a newbie I don´t really understand all the numbers and tests. I mean the Raptor does´nt achive top marks in every test and I dunno which are the important ones.

:oops: 

More interested in the real world experience outside the testlab. Any input there?
Related resources
April 24, 2007 1:55:38 PM

Quote:
Thanks for the link - but as a newbie I don´t really understand all the numbers and tests. I mean the Raptor does´nt achive top marks in every test and I dunno which are the important ones.

:oops: 

More interested in the real world experience outside the testlab. Any input there?


Generally, the Raptor series is significantly faster than average 7200 RPM drives. Especially if you have your OS loaded on one. I have four Raptors. Three 74GB and a fourth 150 GB edition I am currently about to use for the first time on a new system. They are considerabally faster. HTH.
April 24, 2007 2:00:46 PM

Okay - maybe I will save up for a Raptor to run my OS on, then.

8)

Thanks for input!
April 24, 2007 2:08:30 PM

Quote:
Okay - maybe I will save up for a Raptor to run my OS on, then.

8)

Thanks for input!


I have found I can FEEL the difference using my systems equipped with Raptors. The system I'm on now has XP Pro installed on a 74GB Raptor and Vista HP32 on a 7200 rpm WD 250 GB drive. The Raptor drive is much faster. I think they are worth the money especially if you can find one on sale.
April 24, 2007 2:23:51 PM

Just to let you know, since you say you're fairly new to all of this.

The Raptor is more noisier than standard HDD's, due to the main fact it runs 10,000rpm as is basically a SCSI Enterprise HDD in disguise.

Just thought I'd let you know. Samsung also do great, fst 7,200RPM drives, and are well known for being very quiet.
April 24, 2007 2:26:50 PM

Thanks - I have heard this. But I´m going for a Antec P150 chassi with rubbermounts for harddrives so I guess The Raptor wont be too noisy...
April 24, 2007 2:30:05 PM

I have a 36 gb Raptor. I can heard it but i wouldnt really say its loud. I only hear it when its shearching for something not when its idling.
April 24, 2007 2:30:10 PM

Have a look at the Antec P180, just FYI.

I would consider that one personally.
April 24, 2007 2:36:46 PM

Quote:
Hi!

Getting a new computer together and am a bit fuzzy about going for a cheap 7.200rpm drive or a expensive 10.000rpm drive for my WIndows Vista to run on.

Is there a remarkable difference in real life speed between the two?


My experience is that Raptors do feel a lot quicker, but I am comparing to a previous-generation 7200 drive. I recently played COH, which apparently has very long load times according to reviews, but I didn't notice this at all.

The latest perpendicular recording drives are however a lot faster than the old ones - the Seagate 7200.10 series is very highly regarded for example, and there is a 320MB version.

One thing to bear in mind - Raptors are very loud when seeking unless you suspend them. Infact my Raptor is louder than my SCSI 15K drive.
a c 167 G Storage
April 24, 2007 2:41:51 PM

I have a 150gb raptor in an Antec Solo case. (the same as P150) without the PSU. I don't think there is a noise issue. I often have to look at the front HDD led to know if it is active.
April 24, 2007 2:46:36 PM

Some say it´s load and some say it isn´t. Guess it´s important to mount it good in a silent chassis.

ANtec P150 is quiet and large enough for me.
April 24, 2007 3:12:23 PM

bottom line: Get the Raptor for performance its really, really worth it.

As for noise its more a matter of your chasis and where its located. Mine is located next to my chair and with the door off I can hear it loud and clear at times. When I put the door on, not so much. If you have a quiet room then you will probably hear it now and again but nothing that will be distracting.

If you must have absolute quiet then I recommend sound dampening materials for the inside of your case.
April 24, 2007 3:29:20 PM

you could always get 2 7200.1 and RAID them together - there an idea
a c 114 G Storage
April 24, 2007 4:35:29 PM

Four things primarily affect HD performance. Of course interface limitations and other issues can enter into the equation but in general

Speed - All things being equal a 15,000 rpm drive is twice as fast as a 7200 rpm drive, a 10k drive is almost twice as fast as a 5,400 rpm drive.

Platter Density - How much data you can find in a given area on the drive affects how fast info comes off it. If one drive's data is twice as dense, all things being equal, it will be twice as fast.

Platter size - Data rate is affected by an extent by platter size. If two drives spin at the same rpm, then again all other things being equal, at a point say 2" from the center, they will have the same rate of data past the read / write heads. However if one drive is bigger than the other, then at the outer edge, more "disk" passes under the head in one revolution on a 3.5" drive than it does on a 2.5" drive.

I/O tweaking - Manufacturers tweak how a drive handles I/O in order to match there market. For example, as indicated above, all things being equal a 15k drive is twice as fast as a 7200 rpm drive....and a 15k drive is 50% faster than a 10k drive. However they are not equal as the manufacturer's have tweaked their drives to operate best for their chosen market. Optimizing a drive for server performance for example, means it's not optimized for single user or gaming performance. Asa result, the 15k drive despite its inherent speed advantage, which is optimized for server usage, may be better and may be worse in gaming.

Let's say this optimization cuts down gaming performance by 30% in one game and 60% in another. That would mean that the 15k drive's 50% raw speed advantage is hampered by not being optimized by amounts of 30% and 60%. So while it would still be 20% better in the 1st game it would be 10% worse in the 2nd.

So the reason you can't just compare one factor is that one drive might spin twice as fast but the slower one may have greater density, may not be the same size and how was it optimized ?

Here's some comparisons between a fast (Fujitsu) SCSI drives and the Raptor and a typical 7200 rpm 500 GB drive for example

Far Cry: SCSI 1099 / Raptor 935 / 500 GB 665
Sims 2: SCSI 885 / Raptor 1010 / 500 GB 690
WoW: SCSI 885 / Raptor 775 / 500 GB 545

Access Time: SCSI 5.7 / Raptor 8.0 / 500 GB 13.5
Max Transfer Rate: SCSI 97.4/ Raptor 88.3 / 500 GB 69.0
April 24, 2007 8:59:15 PM

I don't know what kind of MB you have but if it has an onboard sata controller that supports raid, you really need to consider other options.

There is no question that a raptor has faster seek-times and delivers killer performance.

But if you can do the raid thing and are primarily interested in just pure punch, you need to look at bigger picture... These are rough numbers so YMMV.

for $200 I can get 4 80G seagate 7200.10 drives which when configured as raid 0 will net me 320G and totally BLOW THE DOORS OFF (size and throughput) of any $200 raptor configuration you could ever consider. Regardless of the raptor size, if you look at what you can get for the same $$$, and wisely configure it, you will ALWAYS be able to slaughter WD primarily in terms of capacity because they are WAAY overpriced. But raptors are fast and if you could afford a 4 drive raptor raid0 configuration, then it would give you the highest performance.

good luck.
April 26, 2007 2:03:35 PM

That is true, but of course you can't compare the $200 that literally. You need a PSU with enough power connectors and power/wattage, you need 4 free 3.5" bays instead of 1, you need better cooling, and your power bill will be higher.

I do agree with the points you said, but it's not a bad idea to look at the negatives as well.
April 27, 2007 8:43:18 PM

for numbers sake, a notebook 4200 drive compared to a 7200 is about 33 percent faster, bottom line.
For performance, get two wd aajs's (160gb) and be done with it.

Raptors aren't always the most reliable either. They've made many upgrades since they were released, including a larger buffer which competes with any raid setup you throw out there, it's neck and neck.

Also, to gain some performance, make sure your controller has NCQ off. Your hard-drive has cache enabled in the driver, and turn off drive indexing.
May 5, 2007 9:43:25 PM

Quote:
Raptors aren't always the most reliable either.


Raptors are aimed at the enterprise market and have a 5 year warranty. I haven't heard anything about them not being reliable.

Can you provide some evidence?
May 9, 2007 6:35:52 PM

I considered Raptor vs Raid 0 config for a long time, I went with the Raptor and I love it. My wife has the Seagate 320 someone mentioned. My system is pretty much the same spec as hers, but mine is much more responsive and loads games way quicker than hers. Raid 0 is a great alternative but its twice as likely to fail and when/if it does ur screwed, so thats another thing to consider. The Raptor price is one tough pill to swallow, but if you can, you will not be disapointed. I have an Antec 900 case, the Raptor is so loud... but its worth it IMO.
May 9, 2007 9:08:26 PM

All I'm saying is, Raptors are so fast they beat a raid0 set-up. They've been around awhile too which makes them reliable, western digital, as I recall had many problems back when they were manufactering drives over ten gigs, but I do admit, the're reign in sata drives is nothing to cough at
May 10, 2007 12:15:52 PM

I went with the Raptor over a raid0 and love it. But I will also probably be buying another Raptor later to Raid them :) 

Everybody keeps talking about how load the raptors are but I can barely hear mine in my Thermaltake Armor 8000BWS case.
May 11, 2007 12:16:37 PM

Quote:
I went with the Raptor over a raid0 and love it. But I will also probably be buying another Raptor later to Raid them :) 

Everybody keeps talking about how load the raptors are but I can barely hear mine in my Thermaltake Armor 8000BWS case.


A lot of it is depedent on your case, my 900 is quite "open." The front panel has mesh grills, the side has another mesh grill, so you hear the drive. There is nothing to muffle the sound. It's all about tradeoffs right, yeah I hear everything in my case but at the same time everything in my case is cool. Plus it's one of those things you get used to then you no longer hear it.
May 12, 2007 3:08:10 AM

Quote:
Also, to gain some performance, make sure your controller has NCQ off. Your hard-drive has cache enabled in the driver, and turn off drive indexing.


What is NCQ and how does turning it off increase performance?

Vista 32bit | Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66 GHz | BFG GeForce 8800 GTX | Patriot EP 2X1GB PC2-8500 DDR2-1066 CL5-5-5-9 | 3ware 9650SE-4LPML RAID Controller with BBU | 150GB Raptor x2 RAID 0 - OS/Swap | 150GB Raptor x2 RAID 0 - Data | 150GB Raptor - Backup | SB X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro Series | Dell E207WFP & Samsung SyncMaster 213T | Asus Striker Extreme | PC Power & Cooling Turbo-Cool 1KW-SR | Silverstone Temjin TJ07 | Zalman CNPS9700 NT | 3DMark06: 10294 (1280 x 1024)
May 14, 2007 2:54:56 AM

Does raptor HD generate a great deal of heat? Can this heat cause cable to melt?
May 14, 2007 3:44:02 AM

Quote:
The Raptor is more noisier than standard HDD's, due to the main fact it runs 10,000rpm as is basically a SCSI Enterprise HDD in disguise. Just thought I'd let you know. Samsung also do great, fst 7,200RPM drives, and are well known for being very quiet.

On one hand yes, those Spinpoint drives do measure up as being very quiet. On the other hand, I have four Raptors in my main system and the only time I hear them is during head seeks. Even then the four drives together (RAID 10) don't make as much seek noise as did my single 15K Cheetah.

Everything is relative.

-Brad
May 14, 2007 4:04:27 AM

Quote:
Also, to gain some performance, make sure your controller has NCQ off. Your hard-drive has cache enabled in the driver, and turn off drive indexing.


What is NCQ and how does turning it off increase performance?
Native Command Queueing.

You should try searching the Internet for info like this, so we don't have to re-invent the wheel, or re-type it at least ;-). But since some of the results may get a little too technical...

In a nutshell, NCQ has the hard drive's built-in logic evaluating the incoming commands for reads and writes, looking to see where on the platters all that data resides, and tries to re-order those commands to reduce the overall distances traveled by the head assembly in order to speed up the overall performance. It's the head travel, after all, that is the most time consuming element in retrieving data from the drive or finding a place to put it on.

A fairly stupid but usable analogy is the GPS receiver units that feature trip optimization. You plug in a bunch of waypoints and the unit orders them so you travel the shortest possible distance.

Your real question should have been WHY does turning it off increase performance, but that's a trick question anyway. The answer is that turning off NCQ tends to increase performance in most desktop usage scenarios because most desktop software does not impose enough demand on the hard drive to make it worth the time it takes to evaluate all those commands and re-order or re-prioritize them.

NCQ shines on servers with multiple users, or on very heavily utilized desktops, such as folks who run a few VMware sessions simultaneously. It also tends to help a bit when boxes over-commit memory, since it can help arbitrate page file I/O with software I/O. But if you can afford drives with NCQ you should bloody well be able to afford enough RAM to keep the page file quiet.

-Brad
!