Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Raptor or 2x standard SATA with Raid0

Last response: in Storage
January 5, 2005 10:39:00 AM


I am looking at buying either a Raptor 76GB or 2 fast SATA drives configured with RAID 0 but I need to know the following:

Is the extra speed on the Raptor really worth it for double the price? I play games on the PC and will only spend the money if there will be a notable difference in performance etc. I can see on the benchmarks on the site that it is quicker but I am still concerned that the "real world" difference is negligible.

Thanks in advance.
January 7, 2005 10:19:48 PM

Definately go with the Raptor, its going to be faster and a lot more reliable.

If you have ever seen actual benchmarks for motherboard raid 0 arrays they are not that impressive.
Related resources
January 7, 2005 11:01:23 PM

I agree with sjonnie and Codesmith, I 2x120GB Seagate 7200.7's in a RAID0 array on my computer and I only notice a slight increase in load times on big levels. Other than that there in no performance increase. The raptor will serve u better.
January 7, 2005 11:01:28 PM

I agree with sjonnie and Codesmith, I 2x120GB Seagate 7200.7's in a RAID0 array on my computer and I only notice a slight increase in load times on big levels. Other than that there in no performance increase. The raptor will serve u better.
January 8, 2005 4:38:31 AM

Just something to think about:

I have noticed quite a few Raptor 36.7GB and Raptor 74GB *refurbished* drives on the net for sale. Either they had a bad batch or they got damaged in transit or in a persons possession. Just a tidbit for digestion. I tend to stay away from products with a high refurb rate.

<font color=green><b><i>Lizards</font color=green></b> do <b>not</b> taste like <b><font color=yellow>chicken</font color=yellow></b>,<b> <font color=yellow>chicken</font color=yellow></b> tastes like <font color=green><b>lizard.</b></font color=green></i>
January 9, 2005 10:11:56 PM

Greetings Michael,

Here's a well written and empirical analysis
of RAIDs in various configurations:

This article may answer your question directly.

We recently assigned C: to a single WD 74GB Raptor
on an ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe, and never looked back.

It works marvelously fast with a 2.8GHz P4 512K L2 cache
and 800MHz FSB (Northwood core).

We got hit pretty hard by a virus last year
on an aging Windows 98/SE machine.

We now depend a LOT on Drive Image 7 to create and
restore "image" files of our C: partition on the
new ASUS motherboard with Windows XP/Pro.

This is the fastest way we know of recovering from
a destructive virus or worm.

This software (now acquired by Symantec and re-named
"GHOST") does not appear to work if C: is on a RAID 0,
however, and that is one of the main reasons why
we did not configure C: on a RAID of any kind.

We did want speed AND reliability for C:,
to accelerate program launch speeds and
minimize headaches.

We're planning right now to build an experimental
machine which will also have a single HD for C:,
plus a RAID 0 with 2 x SATA HDs @ ~40GB each
(80GB total "striped"). We chose a single HD
for C: so we can easily restore C: from an
"image" file written by Drive Image 7.

On our special-purpose RAID 0, we plan to
store ONLY the Internet Explorer cache, and
possibly also the Windows swap file (for now).

This RAID will consist of SATA drives at
either 7200 rpm or 10,000 rpm (e.g. WD Raptors).

Because the IE cache tends to get large,
the more so as we browse the Internet,
Drive Images of C: grow larger accordingly.

By moving the IE cache to different drives,
C: stays quite static.

Moreover, the Windows swap file is volatile and
does not need to be saved between shutdown
and startup. So, it too can be assigned
to such a RAID 0.

And, for our database, we will go with a
single large 300GB PATA Maxtor with 16MB cache
(which we just bought at Office Depot at 50% discount)
and possibly add future SATA drives of similar size.

This machine will plug into a Gigabit LAN, which
also has lots of storage space on the other nodes
for backup purposes, e.g. XCOPY /s/e/v/d (across
the Gigabit switch) of complex folders with 50,000+
discrete files.

Another way of insuring "snappy" program launch
speeds is to make sure you have extra RAM,
which reduces the need for swap file I/O
in the first place.

I hope this helps.

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Webmaster, Supreme Law Library
January 10, 2005 4:22:38 AM

Thanks for the advice, I will look at the new pricelists to make my final decision...
January 11, 2005 2:09:50 AM

Norton Ghost is a life saver :) 

All Raptors (even OEM) come with a 5 year waranty :) 

Raptors are a bit loud :( 
January 13, 2005 6:50:53 PM

raptor 74gb hd is the best thing i ever bought for my computer, if anyone out there is reading this and contemplating buying one, i would say go and get one as soon as u can, you will notice the difference straight away, they are not that loud either, to be honest my case fans are the noisiest part of my system.

I mean if your a fanatic about having the computer totally silent then maybe but for acceptable sound levels i would say a raptor is really no different sounding than any other harddrive and for the speed its well worth it.