Best hard drive setup for a gaming system?

[Bobthelost]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
get two 250GB SE16 WD drives in raid 0, it will actually take advantage from the sataII, and it's only $112

You wot?

How on earth is that going to be any different to 150 SATA?

Do you really think that it'll be faster than the 4000KD, if so i'd love to see some benches to prove it.

2x250Gig drives for $112? I'm ever so slightly doubtful for some reason. Since you pay almost that much for one in the UK.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
a 36GB Maxtor Atlas 15k RPM SCSI drive is only about $100. Throw in a controller for ~$20, and you have something much faster than the 74GB Raptor for only $120.

have you used the early gen atlas 15k hdds? i am contemplating between it and a fujitsu mau ( i think, the 1gen older one) series but my new rig only has a 70mm fan on the hdds, although the case is aluminum...wondering how hot the maxtor ones get...

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: firewolfsm
get two 250GB SE16 WD drives in raid 0, it will actually take advantage from the sataII, and it's only $112

please explain how it will take advantage of sataII?? NCQ? that is usually not too much if any improvement. and the bandwidth will probably still be under 150MB/s

 

[t3h l337 n3wb]

I haven't used the Atlas drives, but they're pretty cheap, and I heard Maxtor's SCSI division is a lot better than their ATA division.

 

[l Xes l]

if i had the money... i'd really get this...
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2480&p=7

 

[foodfightr]

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
Get a 36GB 15kRPM SCSI. The 150GB Raptor is a waste as a system drive. You're never going to fill up 150GB of apps.

Well, then you can partition for storage.

SCSI is great for multi user enviornments. The fastest SCSI drive (Maxtor Atlas II) can be had for just under $200 in the 36GB variety. I wouldn't skimp on a controller, or you'll begin to wonder why you invested in SCSI.

When it comes to the fastest of the fast, Maxtor's 147 GB Atlas 15K II remains untouchable. The drive offers significant performance benefits over the competition under light to moderate loads and maintains a tenacious lead under the heaviest of queue depths.

Quoted From: Leaderboard

As for the raptor, it consistently beats the Atlas II in real world gaming bechmarks by 10% or more Input/Output operations. What I'm getting at is that for single user enviornments, you can't beat the raptor.

Comparison

Raid 1 is not going to present a significant performance increase because transfer rate is *NOT* going to be the bottleneck of your system.

Raid 5 would be nice, but if you went with an inexpensive controller that used the CPU to operate the raid array, you'll take a performance hit greater than the boost you originally intended to recieve.

When it comes down to it, raptor 150 is 68% faster than raptor 36 and is the fastest drive nearly across the board for real world gaming benchmarks, given you aren't running a server in the background.

Not to mention, it won't be as loud or pass off extra heat to your precious components.

 

[BFG10K]

36gb raptor for your o/s games 100$

A 36 GB Raptor is actually quite slow compared to the newer SATA drives.

74GB Raptors are reportedly faster than the 36GB ones

Newer SATA drives are quite close to 74 GB Raptors while offering much larger capacities.

The only Raptor option is the 150 GB version because it's quite a bit faster than other SATA drives and it's also a reasonable size too.

If you don't want to get a Raptor then pick up any of the newer SATA drives with 16 MB caches and you should be fine.

SCSI is a waste of time and money if you're not running a server situation. In fact the Raptor 150 demolishes many of the SCSI drives in typical single user (non-server) performance anyway.

 

[t3h l337 n3wb]

Yes, but the entire point of a Raptor is to boot your OS and apps off of. I don't see any point in storing music or videos on a Raptor. So 150GB is overkill. A 36GB Maxtor Atlas 15k RPM can be had for about $100. I saw a link to some SCSI drives in the Hot Deals section. 36GB should be perfect for your OS and apps.

 

[caz67]

Hi,

Check out my sig details.

I use the Raptor for OS and apps, the 320's in RAID0 for gaming and the other 200g's for back up and multimedia.

Works well for me.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: foodfightr

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
Get a 36GB 15kRPM SCSI. The 150GB Raptor is a waste as a system drive. You're never going to fill up 150GB of apps.

Well, then you can partition for storage.

SCSI is great for multi user enviornments. The fastest SCSI drive (Maxtor Atlas II) can be had for just under $200 in the 36GB variety. I wouldn't skimp on a controller, or you'll begin to wonder why you invested in SCSI.

When it comes to the fastest of the fast, Maxtor's 147 GB Atlas 15K II remains untouchable. The drive offers significant performance benefits over the competition under light to moderate loads and maintains a tenacious lead under the heaviest of queue depths.

Quoted From: Leaderboard

As for the raptor, it consistently beats the Atlas II in real world gaming bechmarks by 10% or more Input/Output operations. What I'm getting at is that for single user enviornments, you can't beat the raptor.

Comparison

Raid 1 is not going to present a significant performance increase because transfer rate is *NOT* going to be the bottleneck of your system.

Raid 5 would be nice, but if you went with an inexpensive controller that used the CPU to operate the raid array, you'll take a performance hit greater than the boost you originally intended to recieve.

When it comes down to it, raptor 150 is 68% faster than raptor 36 and is the fastest drive nearly across the board for real world gaming benchmarks, given you aren't running a server in the background.

Not to mention, it won't be as loud or pass off extra heat to your precious components.

what controller would you recommend? u160 is fine as that will not bottleneck a 15k u320 hdd, even the latest gen and besides, it is faster than what the pci slot can handle anyway. one is not skimping when they get a u160 controller for a single 15k rpm scsi setup, it is all that is needed. if you are going to run 2-3 15k rpm hdds on a controller, then i would get a u320 so they can all talk on the card.

a friend of mine has 2x18GB 15k u320 hdds in a striping raid on a adaptec u320 raid card (i think 29320R) and hd tach lists str as 125MB/s...where a single new gen 15k on a u160 card will show ~90MB/s str as it will show ~90MB/s on a u320 card

 

[8steve8]

the absolute fastest gaming drive is the 150GB raptor for $300...

if thats too pricy get a hitachi k500.

or a hitachi t7k250 which is a $100 2-platter 250GB drive with same electronics as the k500.

scsi drives, even the 15k drives, are not as fast as the raptor 150gb for gamming boxes.

goto www.storagereview.com they are the definitive guide to storage products.


and yes the 36GB raptor would be stupid to buy... as would any scsi unit for a gamming box.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: 8steve8
the absolute fastest gaming drive is the 150GB raptor for $300...

if thats too pricy get a hitachi k500.

or a hitachi t7k250 which is a $100 2-platter 250GB drive with same electronics as the k500.

scsi drives, even the 15k drives, are not as fast as the raptor 150gb for gamming boxes.

goto www.storagereview.com they are the definitive guide to storage products.


and yes the 36GB raptor would be stupid to buy... as would any scsi unit for a gamming box.

why is scsi stupid for a gaming box?

 

[t3h l337 n3wb]

The 150GB Raptor is useless for a gaming drive. You're not going to have 150GB of games, so why pay extra money? Just get a 36GB 15k RPM SCSI drive. It'll be really fast, and a third of the price of a 150GB Raptor. Heck, you could even buy 2 of them and RAID 0 them together. That's still going to cost less than the 150GB Raptor, and it'll be faster. Storagereview's benchmarks show that all 15k RPM SCSI drives beat the 150GB Raptor in every test.

 

[Lasthitlarry]

Just get a SATA drive with 16MB cache and wait for the solid state to develop better.

There are going to be a slew of 10k rpm drives coming out, and solid state will own them all, just wait...

 

[Bobthelost]

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
Storagereview's benchmarks show that all 15k RPM SCSI drives beat the 150GB Raptor in every test.

'Fraid you're wrong on that one:
http://www.storagereview.com/comparison.html
Sims 2 = Raptor 150
Far cry = Fujitsu MAU 147Gb
Wow = Fugitsu MAU 147Gb

There aren't any 37Gb drives there for SCSI. Plenty of 74Gb drives but they are (pretty much) all slower than the Raptor 74 for gaming benchmarks

The highest end SCSI drives do beat the raptor 150, in some benches but you're talking ****** if you think that all the 15K SCSI drives do every time.

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
Just get a 36GB 15k RPM SCSI drive. It'll be really fast, and a third of the price of a 150GB Raptor.

It'll be slower, it'll be a single platter drive against a dual platter drive, if you don't know what that means then go away and learn.

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
Heck, you could even buy 2 of them and RAID 0 them together. That's still going to cost less than the 150GB Raptor, and it'll be faster.

Show me a single, a SINGLE bench to back this up.

RAID0 = Great performance for server type apps, but small increases in performance for gaming to say the least.

From this thread: http://forums.storagereview.net/index.php?showtopic=21621&st=0#

Read it. Post #25 especially all you raid fans out there.

Edited to be less insulting. Was no need for it, appologies to the l33t n3wb.

 

[foodfightr]

Originally posted by: t3h l337 n3wb
The 150GB Raptor is useless for a gaming drive. You're not going to have 150GB of games, so why pay extra money? Just get a 36GB 15k RPM SCSI drive. It'll be really fast, and a third of the price of a 150GB Raptor. Heck, you could even buy 2 of them and RAID 0 them together. That's still going to cost less than the 150GB Raptor, and it'll be faster. Storagereview's benchmarks show that all 15k RPM SCSI drives beat the 150GB Raptor in every test.

I'm sorry to say, but the extra money isn't just for storage, its for performance. The difference between raptor 36 and raptor 150 is a 68% performance boost. Its not the same raptor with more space.

Raptor is basically as fast as it gets for single user enviornments (gaming) and it quieter and cooler.

 

[Bobthelost]

So in summary:

Fact 1) The fastest drives there is for gaming are all in the region of 150Gb. SCSI or SATA aside all the top scorers are 147-150Gb in size, smaller HDs are slower, raptor or SCSI it doesn't matter. Smaller = slower (Bob's first law of thumb).

Fact 2) The fastest SCSI is faster than the Raptor 150 in most games. In the three gaming scores at Storage review the best drive was the fujitsu MAU 147Gb drive, which won by 19% in farcry 15% in World of warcraft and lost by 14% in the sims 2. http://www.storagereview.com/php/benchm...0=277&devID_1=309&devID_2=274&devCnt=3
The raptor's score in the other two single user roles is irrelevant (both in real world tests and in respect to gaming) as is the fujitsu's thrashing of the Raptor in multiuser apps.

Fact 3) By putting discs in RAID0 you will get some improvement. But not much and generally you get much better performance by buying the 150 Gig models than you get by using 2 drives half the size in RAID0.

For anyone who's planning on a gaming build who have already maxed out thier CPU and GPU and are looking for those last few tweaks you are much better advised to buy the largest SCSI 15K drive with a good controller, or the Raptor 150 if you don't want the sizeable noise and power problems that come with SCSI drives, not to mention the fun and joy of a SCSI controller.

If you disagre then show me some benches that say otherwise, i'm always willing to be proven wrong if i have the wrong end of the stick, but without benches there's nothing to discuss.

 

[t3h l337 n3wb]

Oh sorry, I only saw the first page of the benchmarks, and I didn't see 147GB. I guess I should look more closely next time. But still, IMO, the 150GB Raptor is a huge waste, since you're never going to use 150GB for storage. Shaving a couple seconds off of game loading time isn't worth the huge premium for a 150GB Raptor.

 

[Bobthelost]

True.

But for some people that performance is worth the extra cash, wierdos they may be but they do exist.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: Bobthelost
True.

But for some people that performance is worth the extra cash, wierdos they may be but they do exist.

It should be worth it for more people and the main reason is... : A modern HDD is the slowest and biggest bottleneck of ANY PC out there right now. I would normally do anything for added speed, as any speed from the HDD, helps the way the whole system feels on the whole. Mind you, I did sell my 74GB Raptor a while back and get a 250GB Seagate, but the only real reason was, it was not enough space. I might get the 150GB version when the prices come down to affordable (if there are no better options at the time)

 

[Bobthelost]

For gaming spending the money on going for a 150Gig Raptor and probable second HD rather than one large drive for everything would generate lower improvements than spending the extra on a better graphics card.

The most noticable difference in gaming due to better HDs is load time, the I/O performance i've been refering to will not make a massive difference to the fps you get, the reviews of RAID systems show that pretty conclusivly if memory serves. I'd expect a handful of extra fps, but not much at all.

I do have a 74 Gig in my gaming PC, but i did that for my epenis, not for any improvements in it. (Although it is lightning fast for boot times )

 

[NYTRIDR]

there is nothing i love more than a scsi controller in a gaming system...totally sets off the interior design flow. plus the added noise and heat are totally worth it.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: Bobthelost
So in summary:

Fact 1) The fastest drives there is for gaming are all in the region of 150Gb. SCSI or SATA aside all the top scorers are 147-150Gb in size, smaller HDs are slower, raptor or SCSI it doesn't matter. Smaller = slower (Bob's first law of thumb).

Fact 2) The fastest SCSI is faster than the Raptor 150 in most games. In the three gaming scores at Storage review the best drive was the fujitsu MAU 147Gb drive, which won by 19% in farcry 15% in World of warcraft and lost by 14% in the sims 2. http://www.storagereview.com/php/benchm...0=277&devID_1=309&devID_2=274&devCnt=3
The raptor's score in the other two single user roles is irrelevant (both in real world tests and in respect to gaming) as is the fujitsu's thrashing of the Raptor in multiuser apps.

Fact 3) By putting discs in RAID0 you will get some improvement. But not much and generally you get much better performance by buying the 150 Gig models than you get by using 2 drives half the size in RAID0.

For anyone who's planning on a gaming build who have already maxed out thier CPU and GPU and are looking for those last few tweaks you are much better advised to buy the largest SCSI 15K drive with a good controller, or the Raptor 150 if you don't want the sizeable noise and power problems that come with SCSI drives, not to mention the fun and joy of a SCSI controller.

If you disagre then show me some benches that say otherwise, i'm always willing to be proven wrong if i have the wrong end of the stick, but without benches there's nothing to discuss.

i definately understand about platter density and the outcomes that it has on performance. the reason i would go with a 36GB 15k scsi drive is cost as a 147GB new gen u320 15k scsi hdd is very expensive.

imo, 36GB system drive is large enough as i don't run more than 1-3 games at any 1 time. if others do, then a larger drive is for you. in addition to the games, i also have the entire office 2k3 on the hdd along with the adobe suite with numerous additional programs and i only use ~15-17GB.

you keep talking about "a good controller" and "sizeable noise and power problems that come with scsi drives, not to mention the fun and joy of a scsi controller".

this leads me to believe that you have had a bad experience with scsi. scsi is pretty straight forward and the hdds are pretty equal in sound. my 10k rpm hdd is not any louder or even hotter than any of my 7.2k pata hdds. i would say that 15krpm may be a little louder but i am just guessing and wouldn't expect it to be that loud. i have used some older gen 10k u160 hdds (5yrs old or so) and they were loud but my current one, which is a 1gen old fujitsu is definately not. and for power, most people that have mid-high end gaming rigs have enough power, again not sure if you are talking about older equipment...plus if you do have a lot of scsi hdds, you can always stagger their startup as to not put a huge strain on the psu

as for the controller, what is the problem?

 

[Bobthelost]

Nope, haven't used SCSI since the old macs switched to IDE drives. I do hang around SPCR too much, which tends to make me shudder at the thought of 15KRMP drives not to mention the heat that they give off. Look at the power draw for them! Might try it some day if i stay single, otherwise the GF will get jealous again.

A 36Gb SCSI drive might be a good middle ground, but i think that the RaptorII is comparable for desktop use, if not better, and it's probably a bit cheaper. Don't have the stats to prove either way.

 

[foodfightr]

Ok guys, this is my last post on this thread. I just built a very high end $2,500 system which I spent weeks carefully planning out each part down to the last detail and revision. When I was selecting my hard drive I arranged a personal chat with one of the two people responsible for storagereview.com. I had a $300 budget for a hard drive and I was debating between 36GB Maxtor Atlas II ($200) + Controller ($100) or 150GB Raptor ($300). He personally told me that when it comes to gaming, you will absolutely be better off with the raptor as opposed to the Atlas II. (For the reasons I posted earlier.)

I'm currently running 2x120GB Seagate 7200.7 series in RAID0 and I am thrilled at the amount of performance gain I will recieve from switching to this one drive.

Good luck with your final decision, I think all of the most important points have been covered numerous times already.