Since the thread posted about the WD 750 gig drive vs raptor was not really responded to I figured I'd start a thread here. What do you guys thing? Is the 750 gig drive better in general and will not take a noticeable performance hit compared to the WD Raptor line?
It depends on what you do right? If you are always loading files, then the graphs show what kind of performance difference you will see.
But both drives are very fast. The density of the 750gb helps quite a bit.
With the Raptor, you get a bit faster working space when addressing reading from the hard drive (remember many common actions cashe into memory so this isn't needed). With the 750gb drive, you get fast speeds and 750gb worth of space!
Also, keep in mind that both drives are still much slower then memory and neither are an excuse to skimp on 2/4gigs.
Most of my computer work includes, either converting a video file from mpg to avi (stuff like that) audio encoding and gaming. I don't do video editing.Other stuff includes listening to music, word processing, spread sheets and other things that are not HDD intensive. I'm guessing the 750 gig would be a much better buy? You guys think I'd see much of a difference in performance for my primary HDD?
If i wanted back up, i'd either do a raid 5 of put in a sata back plane and fill up 500 gig drives as needed, then pull them.
transfer rates aside, since both are roughly on par with each other in that area, the largest performance difference between them for an OS hdd (and even for most applications running on them), will simply be in your systems ability to access uncached data quickly (responsiveness), largely dictated by the rpms. however, after the data is accessed and stored in memory, the rpms are then much less of an issue, up until you reboot (or run out of available system memory, or clear it)... then recaching of those files is needed to negate the access time differences again. its why even the original 36GB GD raptor is still considered fast for an OS hdd, with transfer rates that arent quite top notch anymore either.
yeah, i mean, for example... since i had some spare 36GB GD raptors sitting unused (after upgrading to a single 74GB ADFD), i decided to put one in an external usb 2.0 hdd case that i got for my bday. i went and installed windows xp x64 on it, and you can definetly see where high transfer rates help (the 30MB/s usb 2.0 limit really gets in the way in these situations... and conversely you can see where fast access times help a lot too)... suprisingly (or not so suprisingly), all games i tried loaded nearly as quickly over the usb 2.0 36GB GD as they do on an unrestricted 74GB ADFD... in fact, most things load just about as fast, even with the bandwidth limitation. and when things need the higher STRs, you can tell too, lol... such as windows boot times benefit from the higher STRs (which is also why raid 0 tends to help a lot there, and why booting over usb 2.0 is slooow)
Why not going for a Rapror as your Operating system and games disk and the 750 for movies, mp3 etc... I have an 160Gb Raptor (yes 160 not 150, custom made for Dells) and a 500GB WD, the previus from 750 with 16Mb cache. My system is kinda mid to low by todays standards (AMD 3800+ single core on Asus A8N-SLI with 1 GB DDR333) but windows load in about 20sec (no joke!) and in oblivion the loading times are a joke! Can you guys tell me of a benchmark for the HDD's so I can maybe post some real world numbers?