• 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.

36GB Raptor

I

imported_hopeless

Senior member
I just recently got one of these & installed it as my primary drive. I did a fresh install of XP w/ SP2. I'm seeing very little of a gain in load times, boot times or much of anything. About the only thing that seems a bit faster is installing XP. At times it even seems to be slower then my seagate IDE with only a 2MB buffer. The drive itself makes no noise that I can hear, which is good I guess, but I don't mind noise from my hd if it helps games or even other programs run / load quicker. Did I get a bad drive or am I missing something?
 
At its release it was a strong contender. But newer large 7200 RPM SATA hard drives have virtually caught up with it in speed. The 74 GB Raptor II is where its at if you want fast without going SCSI. Even in its prime the Raptor hard drive speed was only 10%-30% faster than other ATA drives. 10% is necessary to be noticed, so the speed difference was just barely noticible. To top it off, hard drive speed has no effect on computer experience in counless uses (sure some applications really need all the hard drive speed you can get, but these are much more rare).
 
you should have done your research here BEFORE you got one . . . . everyone that has one is pretty much saying what you are . . . they are 'nice' and a 'bit faster' but unless you RAID them, there isn't that much more performance. 😉
 
/me waits for flood of posts saying the Raptor is so fast they and their dogs were saved from a pack of rabid turtles


I think its also overrated. I personally don't have one in my machine, but after reading so much about it, and hearing other peoples reviews it usually comes down to like loading 4-5 faster in a level and that is it. As for snappiness, some claim its a worldof a difference, others say it is just a little bit faster but not what was advertised. I think a lot of it comes down to how sensitive you are, and how much you need to jusitify your purchase 😉
 
I felt a noticeable difference going to it, but like Apoppin stated back when it first came out it was really competing against ATA133 drives.....I was comparing it to a WD 40gb ATA100 8mb cache drive. So yeah there was a notice difference....Against my Seagate 80gb SATA?? getting tougher to distinguish...Against newer 160+gb drives almost getting null....

I am getting another one (36.7gb) to RAID them, and squeez a bit more life out of them...

Also their price performance really sucks IMO, I can't see them as a real option right now unless like me and need one to Raid with the first....I wouldn't even considered it otherwise and I only will buy on the FS?FT forums cause the retailers almost want as much as I pai 1 year ago...Cmon!!!
 
I too think the raptors are overrated. Too much $$$ for too little storage for too little performance difference ratio. They are great drives but for the cost, IMO, it's not worth it.
 
Originally posted by: dullard
The 74 GB Raptor II is where its at if you want fast without going SCSI.
Click to expand...

Are there two versions of the 74GB Raptor, or are you refering to the 36GB being Raptor I?

 
I'll be going with Seagate drives till the day I die.

Now, I'm only referring to Barracuda 8MB cache ones so far, but if I had SCSI, I'd sure as hell be going with their high end SCSI drives, but I have no money. I'm already deep in overdraft ^_^
 
apoppin: I did research it before buying one. Everthing I read was about how fast it was.

Duvie: That's just it. I'm comparing it to a Seagate IDE drive with a 2mb cache.
 
I was referring to the 36 GB Raptor being Raptor I. Then down the line they released a new Raptor at 74 GB that was significantly faster (not dramatically, but still enough to call it something else). They promissed to make the 36 GB model updated with the faster speed but I haven't heard of it since. If WD has finally released two different 36 GB models, it is all the more reason to keep the names separate.
 
Considering that the Raptor is an *enterprise-class* drive, I find it hard to complain about them. Raptors were not intended for home use. We just learned that aren't too shabby for home use in spite of their intent. I don't think WD ever advertise the Raptor line to be the killer device we sometimes consider it to be.

I'm perfectly happy with my Raptor. If given the chance to upgrade, I will go from the 36GB to 74GB so I can actually install a few more games and benchmarks on my main drive. Six OSes in 36GB leaves only a little room for play.

-SUO
 
Originally posted by: hopeless
apoppin: I did research it before buying one. Everthing I read was about how fast it was.

Duvie: That's just it. I'm comparing it to a Seagate IDE drive with a 2mb cache.
Click to expand...

it IS fast . . . . just not "that much faster" than the modern drives. 😉

I made a thread a couple of months back(here in GH) asking the EXACT question and came to the conclusion i posted . . . . i guess you missed it (and similar threads).

You best bet - if you want max performance is to get another one - i bet you won't be disappointed by Raptor RAID . . . (poorer - but not disappointed). 😛
:roll:
 
The biggest improvement ive ever experienced from a hard drive was going from a seagate 80gb 2mb cache to a new maxtor 160gb 8mb cache. things do indeed load a hell of a lot quicker and norton antivirus scans zoom across.

i've never used a raptor but im sure the increase you get from a 10,000rpm drive compared to these days 7200rpm drives is minimal at best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top