Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

OCZ Core 64 SSD vs Velociraptor 300

Last response: in Storage
Share
July 24, 2008 3:18:16 PM

I think I will get the new OCZ Core 64 SSD

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Other option was the Velociraptor 300

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Any thoughts?
July 25, 2008 9:00:12 AM

the raptor is 300Gb at 10,000 Rpm its a fast drive but its a loud one aswell.

you will hear it compared to other drives.

as for Solid state drives im not really sure about them. my guess would be:

gamer = raptor

other = SSD
July 25, 2008 9:01:40 AM

the SSD seems to be more efficient and wont be as loud and is cheaper.

but you wont get a larger size in tht model than 125Gb
Related resources
July 25, 2008 11:15:07 AM

if price is not a problem for you definitely OCZ Solid State drive. I have read some review recently on tom and it was the best of all tested and it was smoking even 15k server hdds. No matter games or Windows it will be faster you can be absolutely sure about that.

The only scenario it could be possibly slower is if you are copying a file on the same drive (transfer rate).

However notice something else. Solidstates dont deteriorate when filled with data opposite to HDDs. so a full Velociraptor will be at half speed while a full SSD will run on full speed

July 25, 2008 11:43:49 AM

#1 - The VelocityRaptor is Whisper Quiet compared to most other drives. From reviews, you need to hold your ear to it to hear it. Previous Generation Raptors were quite load.

#2 - The SSD will be much faster, but I would still view it for special purpose. The capacity is not that great and longevity is still a concern since the drive can only handle limited writes.

My Choice would be the raptor.

Take a note on how it destroys every other drives, even when they are in RAID-0 and it is not........

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/display/wd-velocir...

That is not to say the SSD would not be faster, but I'm waiting for SSD drives that don't have r/w limits.
July 25, 2008 5:59:45 PM

Yes, I think it will be SSD for me. Funny enough, I did a clean install on a HDD of all my essential software, and it only took up 10GB.
July 25, 2008 6:01:21 PM

One thing I really like about SSD's is that if you put them in RAID 0, the transfer rate scales linearly. ie 100mbps x2 = 200 mbps. With HDD's, it's more like 100mbps x2 = 150 mbps in Raid 0.
July 25, 2008 6:07:37 PM

Velociraptor now; SSD in 6mos -> 1 year. I think by then, we will see far superior techonogy in SSD r/w speeds and larger capacities that make them more advantageous. Velociraptor seems to be a pretty decent price/performance ratio at this point, if that is what you desire.

July 25, 2008 6:27:07 PM

bandit77 said:
One thing I really like about SSD's is that if you put them in RAID 0, the transfer rate scales linearly. ie 100mbps x2 = 200 mbps. With HDD's, it's more like 100mbps x2 = 150 mbps in Raid 0.


And the Bad Part is when in 12months they stop working because the have reached their write limit.
July 25, 2008 6:47:54 PM

zenmaster said:
And the Bad Part is when in 12months they stop working because the have reached their write limit.


MTBF is 1,500,000 hours, which is around 171 years. :ouch:  :pt1cable:  :kaola: 

And here is a blog about write limits: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=1342

I have this drive on my list and a 640G WD for other stuff. :p 
July 25, 2008 6:50:01 PM

DXRick said:
MTBF is 1,500,000 hours, which is around 171 years. :ouch:  :pt1cable: 



Isn't that 2 different things?
July 25, 2008 7:14:43 PM

Get the Velociraptor. @64 GB with a 10 GB Windows install you only have 52 GB of fast drive left. At ~4GB a game that gives you at most 13 games that load quicker. The rest would have to be on your slow drive. As you moved on to newer games you would have to decide if a game was worth the precious space on your fast drive. A 300GB Velociraptor can put your OS and all your games on it, and it pretty freaking fast anyway. If you are not gaming then SSD is fine
July 25, 2008 7:17:02 PM

SSD is a much better choice. I have two of the the Samsung SSD drive...and absolutely love it. One is in my laptop, and the other in my desktop. Here it is.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Make sure when you purchase a SSD that you know which type to get. There are two main types, SLC and MLC. SLC are much much faster, last much longer, and have a greater ability to store data without using ECC that MLC has to use. The only catch is that SLC drives are a bit more expensive than MLC ones...but since SLC drives will probably out last you (kinda scary), it pays for itself over the years.

The Samsung drive that was linked uses the SLC flash storage technology. I believe the drive you linked is a MLC based drive...although I haven't had a chance to check it out yet.

In either case, I will never buy a drive that uses magnetic based storage again, unless I need large capacity for storage.
a b G Storage
July 25, 2008 8:06:39 PM

Get the Velociraptor. SSD's have potential, but the nice ones aren't cheap, and the cheap ones aren't nice. Unless you really would be willing to pay $800 for 64GB, in which case get the Samsung.
July 25, 2008 8:30:29 PM

Since this hard drive purchase is for improving the end user experience (faster load times, etc.) I wonder if he would even notice a difference between the SSD or the Velociraptor. Both of them are extremely fast, just the SSD is extremely fast +1. Will it make a difference even?
July 25, 2008 9:44:19 PM

Yes, I used the Raptor, two of them in RAID 0, until the Samsung SSD. I notice a tremendous improvement. People can read about the speed of a SSD, but it is a totally different thing to actually use it. Once you try it, you will be sold.
a b G Storage
July 25, 2008 10:21:33 PM

pbrigido: I don't care if it is instant, in all honesty. It still wouldn't be worth that kind of money. When it is $500 for 300GB, or something like that, I'll be more likely to buy one, but for now, that's too much money for too little storage, even if it is blazing fast.
July 25, 2008 11:03:46 PM

I should qualify my needs by saying it's primarily for work, and fast load/access times are much more important than capacity. re: 300gb. If you theoretically load up 75-90% of the drive, won't that significantly decrease the performance of the Velociraptor?
July 25, 2008 11:04:23 PM

Hey guys, I've been having a bit of trouble with my OCZ SSD Core Drives, but I was able to work out some of the kinks. Here's my benchmarks, if someone wants to post their benchmarks of their Raptors. Just remember, I am still working out some kinks.

RAID 0:


Single 64GB Core SSD:


Computer:
Asus P5Q-Pro
Q9450 Stock
4GB DDR2 PC8500 G.skill
HD4850 CF
OCZ SSD Core 64GB RAID 0
July 25, 2008 11:05:41 PM

pbrigido said:
SSD is a much better choice. I have two of the the Samsung SSD drive...and absolutely love it. One is in my laptop, and the other in my desktop. Here it is.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Make sure when you purchase a SSD that you know which type to get. There are two main types, SLC and MLC. SLC are much much faster, last much longer, and have a greater ability to store data without using ECC that MLC has to use. The only catch is that SLC drives are a bit more expensive than MLC ones...but since SLC drives will probably out last you (kinda scary), it pays for itself over the years.

The Samsung drive that was linked uses the SLC flash storage technology. I believe the drive you linked is a MLC based drive...although I haven't had a chance to check it out yet.

In either case, I will never buy a drive that uses magnetic based storage again, unless I need large capacity for storage.


Thank you for the 1st hand experience info, it is helpful. The price point on the OCZ is very good compared to an MLC drive. It makes it low enough for me to bite. In any case, when the MLC prices come down, I'll probably again upgrade to a faster drive and put the SLC in a secondary computer.
July 25, 2008 11:07:39 PM

Griff805 said:
Hey guys, I've been having a bit of trouble with my OCZ SSD Core Drives, but I was able to work out some of the kinks. Here's my benchmarks, if someone wants to post their benchmarks of their Raptors. Just remember, I am still working out some kinks.

RAID 0:
]http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/9426/ssdraid0attoeo6.th.jpg

Single 64GB Core SSD:
]http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5662/oczssdseagatevistasp1atzx7.th.jpg

Computer:
Asus P5Q-Pro
Q9450 Stock
4GB DDR2 PC8500 G.skill
HD4850 CF
OCZ SSD Core 64GB RAID 0


That is fantastic. Thank you. I am very impressed with the Raid 0 scaleability.
July 25, 2008 11:17:58 PM

Just be sure to read through my experience with the drives on another Forum... do a google search for it. You'll find it. It wasn't/isn't a plug'n'play experience-
a b G Storage
July 25, 2008 11:18:59 PM

bandit77 said:
Thank you for the 1st hand experience info, it is helpful. The price point on the OCZ is very good compared to an MLC drive. It makes it low enough for me to bite. In any case, when the MLC prices come down, I'll probably again upgrade to a faster drive and put the SLC in a secondary computer.

Quick note: the OCZ is MLC, while the Samsung is SLC. SLC is the faster and more reliable of the two.

As for the Velociraptor slowing down as it fills? Only if you don't defrag it.
July 25, 2008 11:21:51 PM

If its for work man just get the SSD.
July 26, 2008 3:57:52 AM

cjl said:
pbrigido: I don't care if it is instant, in all honesty. It still wouldn't be worth that kind of money. When it is $500 for 300GB, or something like that, I'll be more likely to buy one, but for now, that's too much money for too little storage, even if it is blazing fast.



You have to understand that different people have different needs and desires for performance expectations of their machines. Someone who is willing to shell out top notch dollars for performance and doesn't have a need for capacity will quickly overlook any magnetic based storage solution. My scenario happens to be just that. Many will not be able/willing to go the route that I did. For those people, the WD VR in either a single or RAID 0 configuration will suffice. But again, as I said, it all depends on the person, situation, desires, money, and performance expectations...just to name a few.
!