• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

10k vs. 7.5k RPM speed

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: towely
AMD x2 is now an antique and you will be ridiculed for buying one. Go conroe.

Raptor HDDs are generally regarded as outrageously overpriced and not worth the money, unless you happen to be Bill Gates. If you really desire extra speed, you can RAID a couple 320gb Seagate Barracudas and have a faster, roomier set up for 1/2 the price of a single 150 gig raptor.

Summary: Core 2. No Raptor. Pie is good.
Click to expand...


hey now, i dont know about ridiculed. the 5K is one of the upper CPU's on the market right now, maybe not as good as the best Conroe but still damn good bang for buck. plus it'll hold me over for whatever amd comes out with next.

you've got my attention for this RAID setup though....

i really wanna get a setup like this

drive 1: fast main drive, 160gb or higher. speed most important.
drive 2: 320-500gb, just there in case anything happens and for xtra storage
drive 3: external 500gb drive for most media and any backups i need to do to computers on my network.

what would best accomodate me? because if i could get just as much speed but with less money for the main drive i'm all for it
 
Originally posted by: The Mailman
the 5K is one of the upper CPU's on the market right now, maybe not as good as the best Conroe but still damn good bang for buck.
Click to expand...
No, it's not. Go look at the numbers. A 6400 is almost $100 less and performs equal to or better than an X2-5000. A 6600 is $50 more and blows it away everywhere. I like AMD too, but there's just no contest right now.
plus it'll hold me over for whatever amd comes out with next.
Click to expand...
They have no real plans. Quad-core and improving their process, but nothing really significant for quite some time.
 
oh well, its what i'd rather have

im not alone in this

and you have no idea what they will come out with next. theres no reason why the next batch cant match the intel performance


--------------------------


that said.....whats the consensus here on what I should do for my HDD setup?
 
my system feels a lot snappier in opening programs and server map changes in cs:s, i'm often the first person to join a map. windows boot is about 10 seconds faster estimated? i never really took a stopwatch to count. but a raptor is a good investment in a high end system
 
where are you guys timing you Windows boot times from? mine takes plenty longer than 10 seconds, but its all waiting for the Lanparty splash screen to go away (sied note: how can I make that go away faster?), and I do have a Raptor as my boot drive.

Anyways, yes, its fast. but its not THAT much faster than a good 7200RPM HDD, and the price difference makes in not worthwhile unless you are spending like $5k on your box.
 
will running 2x Barracuda 400gb's in RAID be fast enough? I more than likely will never upgrade unless something breaks so I wanna make sure this will be up to good standards for a few years
 
well all hdd's break sooner or later, and i've heard mixed reviews with raid setups in desktop machines, i can't see myself buying 2 x hdds for half the storage or risk losing 2 x hdd's data if 1 hdd fails
 
good point....in fact, thats why i wanted 2 in the first place

okay just someone tell me what to do here. what should i buy. 🙂 either x2 barracudas (raid or not) or the 160gb raptor with some other high storage drive as an extra
 
Originally posted by: towely
AMD x2 is now an antique and you will be ridiculed for buying one. Go conroe.

Raptor HDDs are generally regarded as outrageously overpriced and not worth the money, unless you happen to be Bill Gates. If you really desire extra speed, you can RAID a couple 320gb Seagate Barracudas and have a faster, roomier set up for 1/2 the price of a single 150 gig raptor.

Summary: Core 2. No Raptor. Pie is good.
Click to expand...

Ummm....OK. Antique? Hardly, that's why there are more still a hell of alot of socket 939 boards being sold? Just bought one, FYI 🙂
Read up, anandtech's own RAID 0 review says there is practicly ZERO performance increase over a single drive. A second or 2 in any application at best. I just went from a RAID 0 to a single drive setup and I can tell you I see no performance increase, as I was putting anadtech's review to the test myself, and this review is correct.

While conroe is better right now, that's right now. You guys are acting like it's the be all/end all of microprocessors. 6 months/year from now when AMD comes out with something better than conroe, are you all going to jump on that bandwagon too and start recommending AMD then? History always repeats itself and soon AMD will come out with something that smokes intel, it's inevitible.
And those that keep suggesting conroe in place of AMD when users want to drop a new chip in aren't factoring in the cost of a new mobo and RAM. RAM for a conroe system is not cheap. I will gladly spring for a X2 5000+ and save a bunch instead of going conroe, if I have a board that supports it.

 
Originally posted by: The Mailman
good point....in fact, thats why i wanted 2 in the first place

okay just someone tell me what to do here. what should i buy. 🙂 either x2 barracudas (raid or not) or the 160gb raptor with some other high storage drive as an extra
Click to expand...

Raptor and a storage drive. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: The Mailman
$339 for an AMD 5000+ sounds like a good price to me. It'll probably last me long enough too.

is it really THAT much more worth it to go with Conroe?

...funny, I own Intel stock, but I wont invest in their new line , lol
Click to expand...


That would be a foolish choice, IMO. Go with an E6600 or E6400. The only downside to Conroe ATM (once you have one) is the mobo situation which, if you want to overclock, is a little bleak
 
definitely agree with going for the core 2 duo route. if you are spending $340 for an X2 5000, spending for a C2D E6600 will blow that out of the water, including the FX-62 in most, if not all applications/benchmarks/real world stuff.

but...i would get a 74GB 16MB cache raptor and a seagate 320GB drive...or whatever other big hard drive you need.
 
i think im gonna go with the dual barracudas

im reading anandtech's review of it right now and it seems to be holding up very well with the raptor, if not better

plus ill be getting a boatload more diskspace 0.8TB diskspace also sounds much cooler 😉

thanks for the help guys, looks like ill go the cheaper route and maybe go 10k for the next upgrade or when I get my laptop in a month
 
i agree go with the 74GB model and a storage drive 250-320GB. should be equal to the price of a 150GB Raptor.

Why is there so much tension in here, when people want to build a AM2 board and not go conroe. If that is what he wants then thats what he wants. Is it your money?

were u guys like this went people were still building P4D systems and not choosing AMD x2!
 
Originally posted by: Makaveli
i agree go with the 74GB model and a storage drive 250-320GB. should be equal to the price of a 150GB Raptor.

Why is there so much tension in here, when people want to build a AM2 board and not go conroe. If that is what he wants then thats what he wants. Is it your money?

were u guys like this went people were still building P4D systems and not choosing AMD x2!
Click to expand...

people are just letting him know for the price he is spending on his AM2 setup, he could get a CD2 setup that will smoke it out of the water
 
smoke it? cummon now. its more like a 5% performance increase. a boost in power I'll likely not even notice.

same money, both are good. i'll be happy in the end either way.
 
If you want fast random access then use a fast drive, if you want sustained sequential access then you can use 7200rpm raid 0 ..

Using hdtach3 I get:

15k 36g scsi : burst 116MB/s, access 5.6ms
10k 74g scsi : burst 114MB/s, access 7.24ms

My friend w/ a e6600 conroe gets:

raid 0 (2 - 250 wd raid ed.) : burst 229MB/s , access 13.5ms Asus p5w dh mobo.

So alot depends on what you want.

In my case I want speed in both random & sequential access.

So my final config will most likely be:

C: 15k 36g for OS (XP & Linux)
D: 15k 36g for programs
E: 2 - 150g raptors raid 0 for editing


Regards,
Jose
 
Update:

I got my 150gig Raptor. It does 135MB/s burst and access time 8.0ms

conclusion: Better transfer rate but not as quick as a 15k scsi.

Regards,
Jose
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top