looking to upgrade to SATA (WD Raptors king?)

[chris_gilroy]

heres what i currently got:

amd althon xp 2600+ (oc'd to 3200+, 400mhz)
asus a7n8x deluxe
512 kingston hyperx 2-2-2-5-1 (also running at 400mhz)
WD 40gb ata100, 7200rpm (avg read is 30mb, burst is roughly 50)

now,,, im looking to get 2 WD raptors (10k rpm/sata150) and put them in raid.... only reason i chose the raptors is because my last time looking, they were the fastest (not only in spindle speed, but also in benchmarks...

my question is, will i see a big performance improvement in upgrading the drives?

thanks for the help...

 

[Vapor]

I'd recommend 1 74GB Raptor, it's more responsive (due to lower random access times) and you'll notice that more than the high data transfer rates of RAID0. If you want to use RAID1 with two 36.7GB Raptors, go ahead, it can't do much harm. Of course, if you're happy with the amount of space you have, 1 36.7GB will serve you well too.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.

 

[gobeavers]

The 74gb raptor though is faster. It features command queing which helps with speed I think. But it is 300 dollars compared to the 110 of the 36 gb raptor.

Anxiously awaiting prescott....is it here yet?

 

[Vapor]

At newegg it's $117 and $253...the 74GB is definitely the better buy at that point.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.

 

[chris_gilroy]

Not to be rude, but:

"If you want to use RAID1 with two 36.7GB Raptors, go ahead, it can't do much harm."

two drives is raid0

 

[Vapor]

I have two 36.7GB Raptors in RAID0...they're nice, but I'd rather have 1 74GB Raptor. You only mentioned RAID in your first post anyway, didn't say which kind, so I catered to both.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.

 

[silverpig]

I've got a 74 GB raptor and it smokes... Love this drive.

Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.

 

[chris_gilroy]

So, you think to sacrifice the read/write speeds (using the 2 36gb in raid0), over roughly only a .7ms READ seek time, and .1 ms Full Stroke seek time is worth paying $20 extra bucks for 1 drive which would be the same size as 2 36gb raptors (the size doesnt matter to me though)...?

i guess in a way if i was running mission critical timing applications i would have to agree, but other that those 2 (nominal in my eyes) differences, I think im going to be going with the 2 drives, and saving $20 bucks even if i was to go with 1 of the larger drives...

also i could have sworn the 36gb drives that are made now, had command queueing?


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by chris_gilroy on 01/27/04 09:44 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[sjonnie]

My main reason for buying the 74GB raptor was the reduced noise. The 36GB versions squeal horribly. Also seeing as I wanted to use the drive as my OS drive read/write speed wasn't important at all compared to access time. Coupled with the WD implementation of command queing in the WD740GD I figured it would be the next best thing to SCSI. Probably should have got a SCSI drive actually, but never mind.

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.html?member=114979" target="_new">My PCs</A>

 

[chris_gilroy]

the squealing noise is because the drive is too hot, coupled with the fact the first gen raptors didnt have FDB, which supposedly they are supposed to now... also, like i said previously i think the "new" 36gb raptors are supposed to have command queueing...

as far as the read/write speed not important, i would have to take the stab and said read/write is just as important as access time... you may have the speed to access a certain part of the drive but its useless if it cant transfer it fast enough, although that statement can be reversed i suppose...

 

[silverpig]

Good luck trying to find any new 36 GB raptors out there... Won't be for a while.

You'll be stuck with 2 of the very loud drives instead of one quiet one...

Some day I'll be rich and famous for inventing a device that allows you to stab people in the face over the internet.

 

[Derek1970]

""Not to be rude, but:

"If you want to use RAID1 with two 36.7GB Raptors, go ahead, it can't do much harm."

two drives is raid0 ""

Not to be rude, but two drives can be RAID0 (Striping) or RAID1 (Mirror).

 

[arussell]

Id also recommend the 74 GB version, I bought 1 myself and just got it UPS. Couple of reasons for the more expensive version: reduced noise, faster, and easier to upgrade in the future, I just need to get another 74 GB and put them in RAID0 whenever I want to, which I prolly will this summer sometime. Ya, they are $$$ but I don't regret it, Ill post again the performance once I get the rest of my parts and build my new comp.

System on the way:
Antec Sonata Case w/380W PSU
Athlon 64 3200+
MSI K8T Neo-FIS2R
1 GB Mushkin PC3500
Sapphire Radeon 9800PRO
WD Raptor 74 GB

 

[jammydodger]

What do you plan to use your computers for? In a system used for gaming the speed increase you experience from RAID0 wont really be noticable.

As far as i know even thought the raptors support NCQ (Native Command Queing) I dont think any of the current on board SATA controllers do. Dont quote me on that though. I think the seagate 7200.7 also support NCQ but because Intels ICH5R doesnt support it I cant use it...again dont quote me on that.

as far as the read/write speed not important, i would have to take the stab and said read/write is just as important as access time... you may have the speed to access a certain part of the drive but its useless if it cant transfer it fast enough, although that statement can be reversed i suppose...

This is true but if you think about the windows opperating system the majority of the files are very small (kb in size) since they are so small the ammount of time it takes to read these files can almost be as little as the ammount of time it takes to seek the files. So no matter how fast your read/write performance with things like windows the read/write time will be just as important (if not more so).

[Insert witty comment here]