The Boston Dangler
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2005
- 14,647
- 2
- 0
- Aug 2, 2005
- 23
- 0
- 66
Weren't the HDD jumpers always there to begin with? Good find stevty2889 I had trouble finding that info thanks for clearing everything up. 
Anyone know a good hardrive benchmark? I googled a little but there are so many.
Anyone know a good hardrive benchmark? I googled a little but there are so many.
Raptors (at least the 36GB ones, i think its the same for the 74 and 80GB's) dont get any good gains from RAID 0, in fact it makes some times slower......
again, not sure on the 74 and 80GB ones though
- Aug 2, 2005
- 23
- 0
- 66
Yeah, but you weren't clear, so I just felt like clearing it up. You just said market...which I would assume to mean "HD/Storage market" not "SATA Market".
Its better to sit on technology until someone beats you than gain a commanding lead?
For a consumer/entry level workstation HD, they should be cramming on more cache and increasing the platter density. For how old the raptor is, it should NOT still be the leading SATA drive.
You're right, as old as it is it shouldn't still be the leading SATA drive (cleared up for you SCSI whores out there). Until Seagate or someone else comes out with a 10k drive with .. say 16mb cache, WD won't be in any hurry to update the Raptor.
That's business.
kd
As far as being unclear about my earlier post, I am in a thread about the Raptor, which is a SATA drive, we are not talking SCSI or Solid state or any other for of storage.
ty
That's business.
kd
As far as being unclear about my earlier post, I am in a thread about the Raptor, which is a SATA drive, we are not talking SCSI or Solid state or any other for of storage.
ty
WD probably has had their techs working on bigger and slightly faster Raptors since the 74G version came out. In fact, it would probably be better for them to wait and see what the competition comes out with, just so they can announce theirs and trump it at the last minute. Dirty marketing trick, but it keeps your drives in the PCs
lol, such a shame you waste your time by putting them in a RAID0 configuration. Read around some forums and some technical benchmarks, RAID0 is only gonna make a nominal diference in video editing, for everything else the diference is not even enough for you to notice.
Oh and by the way I think you got jacked up dude, those are not 80GB Raptors since they have never been produced by WD, E-mail the people at WD and they will tell you the same thing.
You can argue with me all you want, but if you do I warn you that I have proof that those drives are acutally just 7200 Rpm 80GB drives and are actually only a regular old caviar drive.
Correction, the fastest SATA drive (as soon as it comes out, sigh) will be the Hitachi 500GB SATA2 drive (its only 7200 rpm, but it still beat the raptor in benchmarks due to its high data density per platter)
- Aug 2, 2005
- 23
- 0
- 66
The drives are going in Raid 1 now, as for your other comments I'm not even going to argue with you, it already been cleared up that the drives I bought are raptors.
In STR maybe, but it won't come close in access times, which is what matters in most real world scenarios, so the Raptor will definitely keep the crown until HGST/Seagate/Maxtor releases a 10K RPM competitor.
Oh and CreativeTom, you might want to check out the link provided above, where WB's site clearly states that there are 80GB Raptors.
No, im talking abouy access time also
CPU (the magazine) review the 500GB one, and when pair next to a raptor, it did just as well, and sometimes even better, due to the high data per platter density (the more data you can squeeze on a platter, the faster it gets accessed)
im excited for when they come out
Sounds to me like they did something wrong.
Yes if you squeeze more data onto a platter you'll access it faster, in a linear fashion, random accesses(which is what matters) won't be any faster, you still have to traverse the same distance on the platter.
The ways to change that are to make the platter smaller or to increase the rotational speed.
Of course, those two go hand in hand with 3.5" 10K and 15K drives not actually using 3.5" platters.
Im just telling you the results of every review ive read so far, the 500GB is just as fast (on all fronts, and real world performance) as a single 74GB raptor
Not saying you're wrong, just that they are, or they're using flawed testing methods, which very often happens with printed mags for whatever reason.
Primary reason why I've stopped reading printed computer mags these days, even though I usually prefer a printed mag as opposed to a website.
no, im not talking about just the mag, im talking about a bunch of other reviews too. The mag is where i first heard it, and since i doubted it myself, i did some looking, and it turned out to be correct (Hitachi put a muge ass amount of data on each platter. 500GB / 4 platters = 125GB per platter / 62.5GB per side)
Think about it logically.
The seek time is direct result of the time it takes for the head to reach a random place on the platter.
Even if you packed 5 TB per platter, the platter would still be as large, and at a given RPM it would still take exactly the same time to reach that point, no?
Of course this isn't absolute, other things will affect the end result, but not to the degree that a 7.2K drive will ever approach the seek time of a 10K drive, there's just too large an advantage to a 50% higher rotational speed.
Got any links for any of those reviews?
And come to think of it, the 7K500 is a 5 platter design, that is, 100 GB/platter, which Seagate has surpassed some time ago.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 335
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter