Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Raptors VS SLI

Last response: in Components
Share

for £250 would you prefer 2 raptors or another GF8800 GTS-512

Total: 62 votes (9 blank votes)

  • RAPTOR
  • 17 %
  • SLI
  • 84 %
January 29, 2008 8:03:25 PM

Q : I have ~£250 to spend
if you were me would you prefer to buy another GF8800 GTS-512 and run SLI
or buy a pair of Western digital 10000rpm 150GB Raptor Hard disks?

Thanks everyone for responding =)

More about : raptors sli

January 29, 2008 8:04:32 PM

Raptors are a joke.
January 29, 2008 9:13:26 PM

Don't listen to the haters!!! The Raptor drives are awesome. However, your choices are both subjective. On one hand, the Raptors may help your system feel snappier and more responsive, but they don't do jack for gaming really. Maybe slightly lower load times, but nothing jaw dropping.

Same goes for SLI. You may see up to a 40% increase in performance.... IF you happen to be playing the one or two titles that actually use SLI properly, and IF you play at super high resolutions (higher than 1680x1050).

To be honest, while both offer some nice features, neither are necessary for smooth, high quality gaming.

Sooooo..... If I were you?? If you're absolutely sure you are buying one or the other, go SLI.
Related resources
January 29, 2008 9:15:04 PM

Well, if the price of Raptors were lower, they'd be a good idea.

But no. I'm agreeing with cnumartyr.
January 29, 2008 9:24:50 PM

Actually, here's what you do....

Get the other 8800 and go SLI for now...

THEN... Find one of the 36 GB Raptors for sale somewhere, and only put your OS and swap file on it. I'm sure they can be found for a decent price.... and if they can't I'll sell ya one of my old ones.

I say to do this because then you'll have the best of both worlds. While your games would still be loading off another drive (as I said, not really noticeable difference), your OS *WILL* feel more responsive when opening apps. Windows *WILL* load faster. People only really say the Raptors suck because WD is really proud of them and price them that way. They are retardedly expensive for the capacities. However, what makes programs load faster are seek time and rotational speed, NOT throughput (unless you're loading something that would saturate the SATA interface like a large CAD file or the like). FACTS: Raptors have lowest seek times of any consumer SATA drive, be it 150 or 300. They have the highest rotational speed of any consumer SATA drive. You will notice a difference, but it won't be huge.

I may just be trying to justify the money that I spent on my 2 Raptors :)  I am slightly biased, but there's no fanboism in the above, just the facts.
January 29, 2008 9:42:00 PM

Fact: Raptors are just 10k RPM and have (obviously) a faster read time than a 7.2k RPM Drive. Faster RPMs also mean a higher MTBF.

Fact: Raptors have lower throughput than a drive with more cache or perpindicular recording technology.
January 29, 2008 9:43:56 PM

That's what I just said :p 

Well, maybe I omitted the fact about Raptors low throughput, but I did allude to it :) 
January 29, 2008 10:00:22 PM

well, since you dont have the money to go SAS you should get the raptors
sli is not as great as you might here

you need to play at high resolutions to get any benefit, and there are some major problems with sli in some games

and to cnumartyr
since the MTBF is usually 1 million hours i doubt it will fail
one million hours is longer than computer equipment has been around
i have no idea how they can even say the mean time before failure is one million hours, though
January 29, 2008 10:00:56 PM

High RPM disks like Raptors get totally owned by a simple RAID 0 array...
Just get 4 inexpensive 80gb drives (or larger if you can afford and RAID stripe them).
January 29, 2008 10:03:17 PM

plastics
hes getting a pair of them which he would most likely put in a raid 0
January 29, 2008 10:04:41 PM

and another thing raid 0's dont increase performance that much at all
load times and thats basically it
January 29, 2008 10:12:15 PM

How about you have fun and do neither and watercool...OR save the money for a better upgrade
January 29, 2008 10:31:26 PM

Go SLI.

Not even a close choice for gaming.
January 29, 2008 10:43:41 PM

love the picture soldier37
if you really want to be the first in the map on cod 4 get some SAS drives
2x147gb sas drives in a raid 0
on crysis i dont have the best computer in the game, but i am definately in the map first, by atleast a few seconds.
fast drives are seriously bad ass when it comes to comparing your computer to others
January 29, 2008 10:58:52 PM

What do you want?

Faster load times? Examples: Computer loading up faster, programs loading up a bit faster, maps in games load up quicker. Or...

Better gaming performance?

Comes down to personal preference. Me myself I would go with neither. I will only go with SLI or crossfire when 90% of games support it, otherwise, it would be wiser to spend the money towards a better video card. Furthermore, I will only use raid 0 on normal 7200 rpm drives, but that's just me.
January 29, 2008 11:05:41 PM

raptorxt said:
love the picture soldier37
if you really want to be the first in the map on cod 4 get some SAS drives
2x147gb sas drives in a raid 0
on crysis i dont have the best computer in the game, but i am definately in the map first, by atleast a few seconds.
fast drives are seriously bad ass when it comes to comparing your computer to others


You are sooo right, if I was on a budget I'd rather go with Dual Raptors in RAID 0 so I can load Crysis levels faster. Then I can play at 800x600 at all low (exageration obviously).

Personal preference is I would rather have better graphics.

My hard drives were $50 a piece. They are 160 GB in RAID 0 and give me 300 GB after formatting.

HD Tach Results:

Random access time of 14.5ms.
Burst speed was 345.5 mb/s.
The avg. read speed was 116.5mb/s. CPU Util 1%.

RAID 0 Raptors Results:

Random access time of 9.2ms.
Burst speed was 175.5mb/s.
The avg. read speed was 122mb/s. CPU Util 5.3%.

So is that bit of extra performance worth the money? There is a reason I don't buy Raptors.

Hell someone should post specs with a drive with a 32 MB Cache and Perpendicular Recording Tech. These were just cheap Seagates.

Edit: For the record I don't think the performance improvement of SLI is worth it either, however I would choose it over Raptors.
January 29, 2008 11:20:29 PM

I've had 2 74GB Raptors in RAID 0 for 2 years...no failures or anything like that. They perform fine. ...but I was surprised and disappointed when I saw that my other 7.2K Western Digitals with 16mb cache in RAID 0 not only bench faster but load larger files faster as well. The only drive in my system that is slower than the Raptors is my single 500GB Western Digital.

...so all that to say this. Raptors are okay but they're not all that.

Save the $$ for a better CPU or a serious video card upgrade.
January 29, 2008 11:46:47 PM

PLEASE READ BELOW!!! PS...SLI ROCKS MY SOCKS..I don't know about you??

Okay... today I'm going to talk about the value of the WD Raptor 10,000 rpm sata drive. Or the lack of value there in. You see I know how fast technology changes and how quickly prices can change when talking about computer hardware, I've been in the business for over 14 years, and one thing I've learned is this... always wait. Wait till the next big thing wait until the new Graphics chip or new storage technology. Why you ask?? Because pricing always drops to much, much, MUCH lower than when new technology hits the shelves.

The Western Digital Raptor Series of Harddrives is a perfect example of such a situation where I waited.. and waited ..and waited until finally I had enough of the hype and enough of the great benchmarks being thrown in my face on all the websites including our very own Tom's Hardware. Well I decided that I would put these drives to the test, and test them I did.

First let me say that I am no stranger to "Raid" arrays. Every system I have built for personal or business use in the last 5 years has utilized a raid array of some form or another. So in saying that I am no stranger to performance systems as well, and I have always wanted to make my very own raid zero array utilizing 2 or more of Western Digitals amazingly "Hyped" WD Raptor 10,000 RPM drives.

Well my fellow tech heads let me be the first to say I was rather disappointed to say the least by these hard drives but not from a mere performance standpoint, but also a value standpoint as well. The story starts at BestBuy: Thats right folks..when I need something and don't want to wait 5 days for it, I go to the only store that sells Raptors in the Orlando area.. BEST BUY!!.. don't act like none of you haven't occasionally dropped in just to see how things are looking??

I was immediately suprised to find them only 30.00 usd dollars more than NewEgg.com had them listed.. I think NewEgg is slipping guys. So yes they were 199.99 each!!.. Okay thats 400.00 dollars just for 2 drives!! YIKES. Not to mention they are only 150 gb each.. So that leaves me with about a 280 gb raid zero array, once combined and setup. Okay I knew this going in though.. Be strong I said, we need to see if these are what everyone says they are. Are they really that good?? So I took them home in favor of the very nicely priced 500 gb drives from WD that had an 8.6 ms average seek time, and Sata II comparing to a 4.6 ms average seek time to the Raptors with Sata I technology.

I got home and immediately backed up my data and tore my old triple WD 250GB x3 Raid zero array apart. Installed the new Raptors on my 680i Sli motherboard, and configured 2 of my Old WD 250Gbs in a seperate Raid Zero for more storage and comparison purposes. I immediately installed Windows Xp Pro on the Reptiles and watched the fireworks. Installed good but not overwhelmingly fast, and loaded up Windows really quickly once completed. Data transfer and write times seemed on par , but not much better than what I had previously. So I ran HD TACH..(the latest version) and what I found was very disappointing. My 2 Raptors (which I have affectionately labeled Turtles!!) ran far under par to what everyone was saying they should be doing. My HD TACH measurements were time and time again disappointing:

An Average Read of 109 Mbps..
A MAX Burst Speed of 192 Mbps..
Average Seek Time: 8.6 ms
A Sequential read pattern which fluctuated from 100-110 Mbps.. (actually this is very consistant) Average raid arrays will show much more fluctuation in data transfer along the entire spectrum of the array.
All this plus the Extreme high cost (400) for less than 300 total GB... my jaw hit the floor..

Now for all of you wondering what my Three Hardrives (WD2500KS) @ 250Gb a piece performed at in Raid Zero:

Average Read of 140 Mbps..
A Max Burst Speed of 351 Mbps.. thats right (351 Mbps)
Average Seek Time: 12.2 ms
A Sequential Read Pattern which fluctuated from 95-157 Mbps
And a Whopping Cost of ..79.00 USD per drive. Thats 237.00 Dollars TOTAL!!


Now you guys see the numbers plain as day.. Why would any of you ever pay 400.00 dollars for a Raid Zero Array Striped With Raptors, when you could spend 237.00 and get much better performance. The difference in seek times is the only benefit and by a fraction of 4 ms?? that like the time it takes you to blink people.!!!

I will whole heartedly admit that if you are looking for the fastest single drive available to install Your Op System on, these are a viable option, but size compared to performance compared with money spent.. your still losing out.

Needless to say I will be returning my Raptors, getting my 400.00 Dollars back and investing in a new 9800 (G92) platform graphics Card when they are finally released.... Hopefully.. If I do not wait for another 6 Months.

Oh and heres my system specs currently:

Specs:

(1) Quad Core Intel Q6600 2.4ghz. Overclocked to 3.2ghz per core.
(Cooled by A Zalman C9700 Cpu HeatSink) plus (2) Red Led 80mm Fans

(1) BFG NForce 680i SLI Motherboard w/1333 mhz FSB.

(4) Gb of Corsair XMS2 6400 High Performance Ram. (overclocked)

(3) Western Digital 250 gb Sata II drives set up in Raid (Striped) for performance.
(Raid cooled by a 120 mm Red LED ANTEC FAN) I use (1) 160 gb drive as a data backup.

(2) BFG 8800 GT OC 512mb graphics cards in SLI mode.

(1) Soundblaster X-FI Fatality1 Professional series Sound card

(2) Sata//Samsung Dual Layer DVD-RW SuperMulti Drives with Lightscribe Technology

(1) 850 Watt Cooler Master PowerSupply

(1) 450 Watt PC Power and Cooling Power Supply (power for 7 Led Fans) on seperate power switch.
(can be switched off for stealth mode no lights and no sound (EX: Watching a movie
or just surfing the net)

(7) Fans //Red Led Fans (5)120mm and (2)80mm Plus


3DMARK06 Score: 17,584
Aquamark3 Score: 177,344

January 29, 2008 11:59:44 PM

Anytime your money is limited you never buy raptors because anything you couldn't have gotten because of the a raptor will usually have been better than a raptor unless you couldn't have gotten anything else.
January 30, 2008 12:07:09 AM

Hang on, what res are you planning to play at? If you're going to be playing everything at 1024x768 then sli would pretty much be an absolute waste of money, while raptors would only be a slight waste of money.

I have raptors...yeah they are faster but as others have said, it's really not worth the high price tag for the small increase in speed.
January 30, 2008 12:12:34 AM

Maybe you might want one of them solid state hard disks if you really want to load things quickly. I think the Tom's article on them said Windows loaded instantly off of them, but they're pretty damn expensive per Gb of storage.

Oh yeah, go SLI over the raptors if you got the itch to spend money.
January 30, 2008 1:13:50 AM

cnumartyr
first off we have no idea what kind of video card he has
and second of all i agree that raid 0 doesnt increase performance that much
but overall it is a better option, since in 1 month or less nvidia will release the 9xxx series and prices will, of course, drop
he can buy the raptors now, and in a month probably have the money to buy a video card as well
i am basing all of my facts on other peoples post about raptors, but dragoncyber's post is causing me to rethink my decision
i heard raptors were freaking awesome
but maybe not
if i was in the situation i would wait a month and see what video card prices do
January 30, 2008 1:21:31 AM

in case anyone were wondering
2x147gb sas

hd tach:
random access: 5.7ms
burst speed: 381
average read: 213
cpu utilization: 2
January 30, 2008 1:49:20 AM

cnumartyr said:
Fact: Raptors are just 10k RPM and have (obviously) a faster read time than a 7.2k RPM Drive. Faster RPMs also mean a higher MTBF.

Fact: Raptors have lower throughput than a drive with more cache or perpindicular recording technology.


Just because I hate it when people make statements based of off broad assumptions...

The MTBF for a raptor is 1.2 million hours, if you break that down, it comes out to 136 years and some change. What you have to remember about raptors is that they are enterprise class drives, and are built to a much higher specification than your every-day run of the mill drive. While it may be perfectly true that a 7200rpm drive has a higher MTBF, 136 years is longer than any of us will live, so its not really a big deal. The info to back up this statement can be found here: http://www.wdc.com/en/library/sata/2879-001165.pdf

Also, you might want to take a look at tom's charts for HDDs located here: http://www23.tomshardware.com/storage.html?modelx=33&model1=117&model2=676&chart=31 if you look at the average read and write speeds, you will notice that there are a total of 4 and 5 drives that beat the raptor in througput, and, at a glance, only 1 of those drives is cheaper than a raptor, and none of the cane touch a raptors seek times. Yes it is true that the interface bandwidth is a bit low, and there are drives that can burst transfer out of their cache faster, those number really dont mean anything if the average transfer speeds are not close, once you clear the cache you have to read straight from the platter, thats where the extra speed helps in both finding the data and clearing it. So yes, they do not have the througput crown any more, but they do still beat most PMR drives in thoughput, and they crush them in seek times. And you just know that WD is cooking up a PMR raptor.

For the record though, I'd say go SLI. I do have a raptor, three actually, and while I've never suffered a single failure in any of them, they do not help in gaming in any measureable amount. Assuming that you have a monitor big enough to warrent SLI, you will get a much bigger improvement in your games from that. If, however, you are playing at 1280x1024 or less, I'd put that money elsewhere, prefferably somewhere it will make you more money, like a bank.
January 30, 2008 1:52:38 AM

good post e36 jeff
January 30, 2008 3:26:11 AM

FOR ALL THAT IS HOLY !!! JUST GO SLI...you'll thank me later..trust me ..I've been doing this a long time, and Craptors are not worth the 400 clams when sitting next to a shiny new SLI RIG PUTTING OUT 120+ frames a second!!.. I'm running (2) 8800 GT in SLI on a 24" and I smoke every game thats out.. Yes that Cry little SIS game, and the one ..umm CALL OF DOOKIE 4, and BIOSNOT, And the Tournament thats so Unreally real part 3rd.. all at 1900x1200 res all smooth as silk..

So if this is the power you wish to wield my friend, you know what to do.

OH and all you out there saying SLI(Scalable Link Interface) isnt worth it or doesnt work heres something for you:

Please remember to correctly seat your video graphic's adapter into the correct pci express 16x slot, and properly connect the 6 pin power connector to each card. Also make sure your power supply is SLI (Scalable Link Interface)certified....and download the latest Nvidia graphics driver from the Nvidia website. Make sure to enable SLI (Scalable Link Interface) in the Nvidia control panel and for a final touch... YOU MIGHT WANNA TURN ON YOUR FREAKING MONITOR!!
January 30, 2008 3:49:34 AM

Are you kidding? 7200RPM 750s with 32MB cache are a hair away from raptor performance and beat raptors in raw data transfer bandwith.
January 30, 2008 5:08:41 AM

I am unable to vote because I know nothing of your whole system spec's. cnumartyr how are Raptors a joke? Fact (1) Raptors are the fastest quickest HDD on the market. (2) The largest bottleneck in any system is the HDD, because it still has moving parts which limits its usefulness and has hit a performance brickwall.

Any product that decreases the time I have to wait for something to be done wins my money: (1) defragging my HDD fast , (2) makes my desktop speedier, (3) Installing games super dooper fast. Raptors might not have that high disk capacity, but they are speed demons that deserve respect for there speed, reliability and durability 24/7.

With all that mention above, are Raptors really a joke or are they just really really fast at what they do?
January 30, 2008 5:14:57 AM

PlasticSashimi said:
High RPM disks like Raptors get totally owned by a simple RAID 0 array...
Just get 4 inexpensive 80gb drives (or larger if you can afford and RAID stripe them).


How can you compare a RAID 0 (2 HDD) against just one Raptor? I bet two Raptors in a RAID 0 array can totally own a simple RAID 0 array... :lol: 
January 30, 2008 5:56:00 AM

raptors are a relic. time for some newer hd tech.
January 30, 2008 5:58:49 AM

I'll admit Systemlord...they're good at what they're designed for, quick reads. ;) 

I just don't see myself paying out for that when majority of the system is already sitting in RAM. A simple reference to a page file doesn't bother me too much.
January 30, 2008 7:02:11 AM

raptorxt said:
love the picture soldier37
if you really want to be the first in the map on cod 4 get some SAS drives
2x147gb sas drives in a raid 0
on crysis i dont have the best computer in the game, but i am definately in the map first, by atleast a few seconds.
fast drives are seriously bad ass when it comes to comparing your computer to others


I have 4x 15K RPM 36Gb U320 SCSI in RAID-0 and I'm ALWAYS first to load a new map in Battlefield 2142!! (Despite using some very slow Opteron 248's cough,cough - till I can get those 285's mounted :sol:  )

Forget the Raptors they are owned by PMR SATA drives from below (price) and pawnd by older 15K U320 SCSI from above (cheaper per drive as SAS takes over SCSI drives can be had for less) - once you have a controller (OK that ain't cheap for you PCIe only guys). The 36Gb Raptor is a previous generation so you have to get the 74Gb or 150Gb model (to get a decent seek time).

For gaming I wouldn't really bother with fast harddisks (I just hate waiting around for programs to load :pt1cable:  ) till last. After all PMR SATA drives kick butt. The GPU and then CPU/RAM are more important. Once you have the tri-SLI Ultra OC thats when you go out and buy an SSD!! I am looking forward to that new PCIe SSD HD already....

Bob
January 30, 2008 9:50:55 AM

systemlord said:
I am unable to vote because I know nothing of your whole system spec's. cnumartyr how are Raptors a joke? Fact (1) Raptors are the fastest quickest HDD on the market. (2) The largest bottleneck in any system is the HDD, because it still has moving parts which limits its usefulness and has hit a performance brickwall.


HDDs will always be a "brickwall" to performance. However most modern HDDs outperform Raptors at EVERYTHING but seek time. When you say Fastest/Quickest, please support it.

I'll make it a simple comparison. Regular HDDs run marathons. They can run 26 miles at a time. The Raptor tried. It was in 1st place for about a mile since it sprinted, then it ran out of juice and just coasted and finished near the bottom. I know it's a bad analogy, but it's the best I can think of to explain this at the time.

Quote:
How can you compare a RAID 0 (2 HDD) against just one Raptor? I bet two Raptors in a RAID 0 array can totally own a simple RAID 0 array...


It works the same as anything else.

The 36 GB Raptor is $100, the 74 GB is $150.

For those prices I can build a RAID array to compete with it. You sound just like the people saying the 3870X2 is a joke because it's 2 GPUs. If it beats a card at a lower price, what does it matter if it was 30 GPUs?
January 30, 2008 10:36:58 AM

If someone is seriously considering a Raptor, this means quite a budget for a HDD. I would suggest a cheap SAS controller and a SAS drive (like the Allegro), which are quite a lot faster than the Raptor. The Raptors themself are technically outdated.
January 30, 2008 11:55:46 AM

OMG OMG you people are dissin my precious Raptors!! I'll say that when I bought my 2x 36GB Raptors, they were the fastest thing on the market. No PMR, no SAS (affordable), and SCSI is just too much of a pain. They have served me very well, even though I may have overpaid for them. FYI, the 36GB version of the Raptor still has great seek times and read rates. I have had them in RAID 0 since I got them and have run everything from Win 2k, to XP, to now Vista x64 and never had one issue. I'd say I got my money's worth.
January 30, 2008 12:55:10 PM

Have you considered buying just one 150GB Raptor and saving the remaining money for a newer generation graphics card? People will always talk smack about Raptors, so that's why I just decided to spend my money and see what it's actually like. You do get a boost, though it might not seem as worth it considering the money you spent; but they are supposed to last long, so I consider it a long-term investment. Save the remainder of your money towards a 9-series card. Just because you have some money doesn't mean you have to spend it all.
January 30, 2008 1:30:52 PM

Thanatos421 said:
... SCSI is just too much of a pain. ...


Hi

If you can count up to 15 you can cope with setting up unique IDs for each drive using the 4 jumper system (get your granny to do it if it is to complicated for you!!) Linux support is good as well for Host Contollers (unless you are using a soft-hardware raid kludge :fou:  )...

SCSI drives are very reliable and you can't really say that about the Raptor series!! You can can get drives new online to match Raptor pricing but with a 15K RPM spindle speed (at the entry level of 36Gb a 15K RPM SCSI drive will have a much better seek-time than the very outdated 36Gb Raptor).

The main problem is that most motherboards don't support PCI-X cards and PCIe SCSI controllers are a lot more expensive...

So to summarise its a doddle to setup but can be expensive if you don't have a server board.

Bob
January 30, 2008 1:52:43 PM

bobwya said:
Hi

If you can count up to 15 you can cope with setting up unique IDs for each drive using the 4 jumper system (get your granny to do it if it is to complicated for you!!) Linux support is good as well for Host Contollers (unless you are using a soft-hardware raid kludge :fou:  )...

SCSI drives are very reliable and you can't really say that about the Raptor series!! You can can get drives new online to match Raptor pricing but with a 15K RPM spindle speed (at the entry level of 36Gb a 15K RPM SCSI drive will have a much better seek-time than the very outdated 36Gb Raptor).

The main problem is that most motherboards don't support PCI-X cards and PCIe SCSI controllers are a lot more expensive...

So to summarise its a doddle to setup but can be expensive if you don't have a server board.

Bob


While I agree that SCSI is straight-forward to setup (once you're familiar with the setup) I don't agree that Raptors are unreliable. ...as I've posted above, I've had 2 Raptors in a RAID 0 array for over 2 years without so much as a sneeze or burp from either.

Yes, a 15K SCSI drive will, logically, be faster. ...but you have to have a nice SCSI controller to go with it. Is the return on investment high enough to justify?

Raptors, SLI, etc. Rapidly diminishing returns...all so you can "get on the map" 4 seconds sooner?
January 30, 2008 2:37:09 PM

I didn't mean SCSI was a pain to setup.....I have built many machines, many different storage configurations, and SCSI has just never really been worth the extra time and components you need to do it correctly.

You need a good controller, or as I see it, something else in your case to generate heat. SCSI still also utilizes ribbon cables, which block air flow. Overall, the SATA interface is perfect for me right now. Small cables that don't get in the way of good ventilation, and nice, mature interfaces integrated into the motherboard, plug n pray!
January 30, 2008 4:25:58 PM

raptorxt said:
and another thing raid 0's dont increase performance that much at all
load times and thats basically it


I didn't mean to imply that hard drives will impact your gaming performance....I agree that load times are pretty much your only benefit....(maybe a little less thrashing, maybe)

I still can't see justifying the raptors....

RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Drives) - there's a reason why RAID is big in the business I work in (High Def Video Post Processing).

Of course if you want every bit of performance no matter the cost, a RAID of raptors would be blazing.

I'm here to tell you though, my 6 SATA Drive RAID 0 @ work is a beast. And you need it if you want to play back uncompressed high quality video.
January 30, 2008 4:35:19 PM

The beast is the RAID 5 Fiber Array rack mount drawer on our imaging server here at work. THAT is a beast. I've already spoken to my mgr about buying the drawer once it comes off lease. It would only cost me around 10k then :p 
January 30, 2008 4:44:25 PM

Thanatos421 said:
The beast is the RAID 5 Fiber Array rack mount drawer on our imaging server here at work. THAT is a beast. I've already spoken to my mgr about buying the drawer once it comes off lease. It would only cost me around 10k then :p 


Yeah we've got 2 RAID 5 Rack setups on our network, not fiber, Dual or Quad Gigabit LAN (not sure)

those are awesome.

The craziest thing I've seen on the net is some guys 9x solid state drive RAID 0 config...

The speed was limited by, get this, the RAID controller...He eventually got one with a faster chip, but it still didn't take the array to it's theoretical max transfer speed.

Seek time was between .1 and .2 ms
January 30, 2008 5:18:44 PM

I agree with e36, I love Raptors and have 3 myself. I don't run them in raid simply because for the most part the small advantage of raid is overshadowed by the additional unreliability risks. I have built probably over a hundred systems for people over the years and the only 2 drives brands that have never failed are the Raptors and Seagate's 7200 series. I have had several Western Digitals fail but never a Raptor. So if you price reliability as a high priority then get the Raptor because it's "enterprise level." In reality the SLI will probably give you more bang for the buck. If you run at a fairly high resolution and want all the bells and whistles on in a game (who doesn't) then SLI will do a little more in most new games and probably give you a little more head room for the future.

Another option would be save your money and put it towards the 9800 when it's released.
January 30, 2008 6:32:18 PM

Thanatos421 said:
...

You need a good controller, or as I see it, something else in your case to generate heat. SCSI still also utilizes ribbon cables, which block air flow. Overall, the SATA interface is perfect for me right now. Small cables that don't get in the way of good ventilation, and nice, mature interfaces integrated into the motherboard, plug n pray!


SCSI is a parallel standard but doesn't mean you can't get hold of rounded aero SCSI cables!!

Anyway I remember when SATA wasn't a mature standard and you had non-latching, unshielded cables fall out all over the place... like not good!! :sarcastic:  Also support for fully enclosed SATA headers on motherboards took years to arrive - even on server boards (so the cable plug has nothing to physically latch to)... Not a problem anymore...

At least when you plug in a SCSI header you really know it isn't going anywhere!!

Bob
January 30, 2008 10:55:28 PM

bobwya
i was considering getting scsi320
but going sas was about the same price, so i decided on sas
sas is also a lot easier to setup, which isnt saying much because scsi's are also easy to setup
and you are right about the controllers
pci-e is freaking expensive
i went ahead and got 2x147 seagate cheetahs 15.5k with an lsi logic pci-e 4x controller.
if you want some freaking speed go SAS
January 31, 2008 5:21:50 AM

cnumartyr said:
HDDs will always be a "brickwall" to performance. However most modern HDDs outperform Raptors at EVERYTHING but seek time. When you say Fastest/Quickest, please support it.


What I meant when I stated Raptors are the Fastest/Quickest, I meant the time it took to go get the data: example seek time.

Quote:
I'll make it a simple comparison. Regular HDDs run marathons. They can run 26 miles at a time. The Raptor tried. It was in 1st place for about a mile since it sprinted, then it ran out of juice and just coasted and finished near the bottom. I know it's a bad analogy, but it's the best I can think of to explain this at the time.


Good analogy, your right the Raptor falls behind in the long marathons. But most gaming is all about random access times as is most everyday desktop work, this is where the Raptor shines. I am basing my experience with Raptors over the last three years, I haven't been paying attention to the HDD market this last year of 07. When I'm not in the market for something I tend to ignor those components. What other HDD's would you consider = to a Raptor 150GB. :)  Thanks, Systemlord




January 31, 2008 5:34:25 AM

cisco said:
I have built probably over a hundred systems for people over the years and the only 2 drives brands that have never failed are the Raptors and Seagate's 7200 series. I have had several Western Digitals fail but never a Raptor. So if you price reliability as a high priority then get the Raptor because it's "enterprise level."



When I shop for a HDD the first thing I look for is reliability being my highest priority over everything else, even if the Raptors are not the biggest kid on the block anymore.
January 31, 2008 8:30:37 PM

thanks all for the replies, i'm still a bit indecisive,
saw a couple of posts wanting to know my pc spec.
it currently stands on

c2d - E8400 @3ghz
2gb ram
single 8800gts
2x320gb maxtor hard disks , raid 0

am i right to guess sas means higher raid levels?
*yes I am planning to put the raptors in RAID 0 if i get them


January 31, 2008 9:06:26 PM

Option 3:

Wait for the 9800 vid cards to come out…
Sell your GF8800 GTS-512, add what you make to your existing £250 and get the best 9800 card on the market.
!