Trending

Western Digital VelociRaptor WD1000DHTZ Review

By ,

Western Digital recently sent us its latest-generation VelociRaptor, a 1 TB update to what was already the fastest 3.5" disk drive available. Once again, it stymies the mechanical competition with significantly higher performance.

Technical Data And Test Configuration

Technical Data
ManufacturerWestern Digital
ModelVelociRaptor
Model NumberWD1000DHTZ
Form Factor2.5"
Capacity1 TB
Spindle Speed10 000 RPM
Other Capacities250 And 500 GB
PlattersThree
Cache64 MB
InterfaceSATA 6Gb/s
Operating Temperatur5-55°C
Power Draw at Idle (Datasheet)4.2 W
Power Draw at Idle (Measured)4.0 W
Operating Shock (2 ms, Read)65 G

Test Configuration

System-Hardware
HardwareDetails
ProcessorIntel Core i5-2500K (32 nm, Sandy Bridge, D2), 4C/4T, 3.3 GHz, 4 x 256 KB L2 Cache, 6 MB L3 Cache w/ HD Graphics 3000, 95 W TDP, 3.7 GHz max. Turbo Boost
Motherboard (LGA 1155)Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3, Revision: 2.0, Chipset: Intel Z68 Express, BIOS: F3
RAM2 x 2 GB DDR3-1333, Corsair TR3X6G1600C8D
System DriveIntel X25-M G1, 80 GB, Firmware 0701, SATA 3Gb/s
ControllerIntel PCH Z68 SATA 6Gb/s
Power SupplySeasonic X-760 760 W, SS-760KM Active PFC
Benchmarks
Performance MeasurementsCrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 h2benchw 3.16 PCMark 7 1.0.4
I/O PerformanceIOMeter 2006.07.27 Webserver-Benchmark Database-Benchmark Fileserver-Benchmark Workstation-Benchmark Streaming Reads Streaming Writes 4K Random Reads 4K Random Writes
System Software And Drivers
DriversDetails
Operating SystemWindows 7 x64 Ultimate SP1
Intel Inf9.2.0.1030
Intel Rapid Storage10.5.0.1026
85 Comments Comment from the forums
  • acyuta 02 August 2012 11:54
    The Velociraptor at this price is simply not workable for me and for most people. For the cost of 1TB and some money saved, one can buy a good 120GB SSD and a Seagate 3TB. Seagate 3TB is not in the charts but I bet it will be only 10% slower than Velociraptor. This solution smokes out Raptor as a boot device and nearly matches it as a storage device.

    Even on a standalone basis, for me Seagate 3TB at $145 and 85-90% of Raptor's performance makes more sense that Raptor 1TB at $300.

    WD is living in a fools' world if they think that the premium they are charging on normal hard disks (because of `shortages') will be extendable to Raptor.
    Reply
  • 02 August 2012 11:55
    >mfw no ssd in comparison
    Reply
  • vladutztg 02 August 2012 11:59
    Did you test it without the heat sink ?
    What would be its temperature if you'd have done it ?
    Could it fit into a performance desktop replacement notebook like a M18x or a Clevo mobile workstation ?
    Reply
  • belardo 02 August 2012 12:11
    Where is the noise test? I bet anyone $1Million dollars, its louder than any SSD. :)

    Yes, its a fast drive. It is most likely the last Raptor to ever be made. For video work, a typical 5400~7200RPM 2~3TB HD will do just fine. Can buy two 2TB drives + a 120Gb SSD for a tad bit more money... and still have a much quieter running system.
    Reply
  • aznshinobi 02 August 2012 13:18
    For the price you could get a 1TB drive and the Crucial Adrenaline 50GB and combo them for a 1TB+50GB SSD cache. Half the price and probably just as fast.
    Reply
  • Smeg45 02 August 2012 13:20
    Why would I want an SSD in a gaming system? I need bulk capacity and this offers it in a fast package.
    Reply
  • dragonsqrrl 02 August 2012 13:21
    Damn that's a fast drive. Would make a great high performance scratch disk.

    The market for these drives has certainly shrunk in the past few years, and I doubt many enthusiasts and gamers would even consider buying one anymore. It's value is limited to those who need more performance out of their storage devices than your typical 7200RPM 3.5" drive can deliver. Production pros working with large volumes of high res assets and complex project files would probably see the most benefit from a drive like this.
    Reply
  • dalauder 02 August 2012 13:28
    I'm just confused...what is this drive for? It would get absolutely destroyed by an OCZ Agility 3 240GB, which I've seen for $130, I think--$140 for sure.

    If you're doing something where you specifically need 1TB of data accessible quickly all the time, this may have a niche, but it's a VERY SMALL niche. Almost everyone would find better performance paring a 240GB SSD with a 1TB HDD, using up 60GB on Intel's SRT, and 180GB for the SSD to be used as usual (Windows, programs, +60GB for projects/scratch).

    Considering the 256GB Vertex 4 is at $165 and the 256GB M4 hits $150, I'm just completely puzzled by Western Digital throwing money into developing such a device.
    Reply
  • dragonsqrrl 02 August 2012 13:31
    acyutaSeagate 3TB is not in the charts but I bet it will be only 10% slower than Velociraptor. This solution smokes out Raptor as a boot device and nearly matches it as a storage device.No, the raptor is actually quite a bit further ahead than that, especially in random i/o, where it has as much as a 2x performance lead on the 3/4TB Barracuda XT's. Even in sequential reads/writes (generally the performance strong point of 7200RPM drives) it still has around a 50% performance advantage.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5729/western-digital-velociraptor-1tb-wd1000dhtz-review/2
    Reply
  • rantoc 02 August 2012 14:18
    The enthusiasts already have SSD's for at least their boot drive (or the whole system like me), a few might consider those for "bulk" storage drives but beside that i doubt its much market for the drive sadly. It don't no matter how impressive it is as a mechanical drive because it cannot compete with the SSD's. Still remember the first raptor, darn was it fast compared to the HDD's of that time before the SSD's came and change everything.
    Reply