Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Raptor x4

Last response: in Storage
Share
December 25, 2007 2:40:41 AM

Hey, i was wonder if there are any performance benefits from running x4 74GB raptors vs x2? (besides the obvious more storage)

I found 2 'used' raptors going for $80 and another pair for $200 and i was thinking about buying them then combining them in RAID 0

are there any benefits?

More about : raptor

December 25, 2007 4:25:01 AM

The new Segate 7200.11 is a better drive and the 500GB unit (the -small- one!) was $99 USD when I bought one 3 weeks ago.

The problem is that the new 7200.11's in that size are sold out and only the overpriced (vs 2 500's) 750GB ones can still be had online right now.
December 25, 2007 5:16:22 AM

Ah can you point me in there direction? and what Company is good? WD seagate?
Related resources
December 25, 2007 5:47:55 AM

Xazax310 said:
Ah can you point me in there direction? and what Company is good? WD seagate?


I agree wth zolddude. The are sold out at the $99 price point but Newegg has them for $120 with free day shipping so that may make the price difference more palletable. Notice the cache size; the previous generation of PRT drives were only half that. Newegg had them in stock 5 mnutes ago. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148288

Model
Brand Seagate
Series Barracuda 7200.11
Model ST3500320AS
Performance
Interface SATA 3.0Gb/s
Capacity 500GB
RPM 7200 RPM
Cache 32MB <<<<<<<<<
Average Latency 4.16ms
Physical Spec
Form Factor 3.5"
Features
Features Proven second-generation perpendicular recording technology
December 25, 2007 5:53:26 AM

Thanks so two in Raid 0 will really boost performance? or is one good enough?
a b G Storage
December 25, 2007 6:11:40 AM

What are you doing that accesses the harddrives so much that you need this kind of horsepower? Most people don't do anything that requires this amount of harddrive computing power. Instead of coming here and telling us the answer, tell us whats wrong. Let us help you find a solution, rather then telling us what solution you want.
December 25, 2007 6:13:19 AM

Well im a huge gamer and i want the best performance, i dont have a problem i just want what will give the best performance, and is good pricewise.

Thanks for your help BTW!
December 25, 2007 6:22:56 AM

Well the spec sheet on seagates site rate them at 105MB/s sustained which assumes the buffer is mostly flushed generally and you are only doing rotational speed. Serial access may be at closer to interface speed. This is one fast drive with <1ms track to track access and <8ms average and 4.8 ms latency.

I would think one would woop a** with out the need for raid. However considering what you were willing to pay for 74gig raptors, go for it if you think that you need it :) 
December 25, 2007 6:37:30 AM

Two Raptors in RAID 0 can be very fast! See one HDD can read and at the same time the other HDD can write to memory. While only one HDD can either read or write but not both at the same time. Raptors are very quick at access times at 10,000RPM's and just one 150GB Raptor is fast enough, but two would be blindingly fast!
December 25, 2007 6:47:52 AM

Thats what i was asking but these two told me something different so im still left in the dark! what is better 2/4 Raptors RAID 0 or Two Seagate 7200.11 32MB cache?
December 25, 2007 7:05:58 AM

A gamer is the last person that needs a 10k hard drive, I second the idea of a 7200.11, and if it loads half a second slower, who cares?
December 25, 2007 7:10:03 AM

Im The Gamer lol! im leaning towards the 7200.11 simply because its $120 for 500GB and pair of these is 1TB of pure storage compare to the 74GB Raptors price $150 and combined storage 148GB.

Only thing is i will never used 1TB of space ever in my life. So is there any 250GB? or 160GB storages that are just as good as the SeaGate 7200.11 500GB or simply is that 32MB cache just a killer performance?
a b G Storage
December 25, 2007 7:18:14 AM

If you are a gamer and are building a new computer, just get the 500GB 7200.11. If you don't need 1TB, just get the single drive. As I said, gamers don't need excellent hdd specs. Spend your money on a fast CPU or GPU. Get a really good monitor, or a gaming mouse. Don't dump a bunch of money on something that won't effect your frame rates at all during game play, and only effects level loads a bit. Your money can be better spent.
December 25, 2007 7:21:06 AM

Alrite, ill take your advice and get one.
Thanks for you feedback/information/help guys. :D 
December 25, 2007 7:58:29 AM

hmm so if i Partition the 500Gb seagate to say 50GB 50GB and 400GB (using both 50GB for my games and the 400GB for Vista/music) i would see a huge performacne thats very interesting.. and im assuming the 32Mb cache would only make it faster?
December 25, 2007 8:01:55 AM

systemlord said:
Two Raptors in RAID 0 can be very fast! See one HDD can read and at the same time the other HDD can write to memory. While only one HDD can either read or write but not both at the same time. Raptors are very quick at access times at 10,000RPM's and just one 150GB Raptor is fast enough, but two would be blindingly fast!


Not to start an argment but it really depends on what you are comparing. Seek time track to track is twice as fast as the 7200.11 however even though the Raptor 74 and 150 are spinning at 10,000 RPM the sustained transfer is only 84 MB/s compared to the 7200.11's 105 MB/s If you are loading big blocks of data as a game would I think it would be a tight race between the two drive brands. Unless the data are extremely fragmented then Seagate probably has the edge.

Until a reputable site like Tom's or Anand does a head to head, under lab conditions, price probably should be favored more. I think that the Perpendicular Recording Technology used by Seagate shows that horizontal bits are on the way out. The interface on the Seagates also supports 3GB/s for interface bursts while the Raptors are still stuck at 1.5GB/s. Most other spec's between the brands are about the same except for noise which as you would expect at a higher RPM the raptors are considerably noisier.

Also with Raid 0 interlacing the tracks there is not much time for read v. write when you are using multi-sector clusters at the file system/operating system level. As indepent drives that might become a factor but the same applies for Seagate. Unless you have a true controller with its own CPU and not the ones on the motherboard you are going to have a hard time matching stripe/block size to the file system cluster size. I am not a big fan of motherboard based raid controllers. There is a reason that good ones cost hundreds of dollars v. a less than 10 dollar in quantity chip. :ouch:  :D 
!