10K Drive worth it?

Biohazard · 31 Dec 2007 at 13:44

My current IDE 7200rpm 80Gb is rather full, with 4 Gb left free. I can't even defrag any longer.

I was looking to get a WD 150GB UDMA 150 10000RPM 16MB RAPTOR (SATA obviously).

However I have heard some say that 7200's, particularly the 7200.10 WD (iirc?), are a relatively close match for performance?

I have no use for a great deal of space, hence the 80Gb lasting me so long. So since I have no real use for 300+ Gb storage, would you pay the premium of high spindle speeds for that 'bit' lower seek?

I would like someone to convince me, or argue otherwise. This is the only buy I seem to be agonising over.

Thanks ppl

helmutcheese · 31 Dec 2007 at 13:47

Your 3rd sentance is correct, but they cant touch the Raptor 16MB on the SEEK Speed, it is snapper at loading Windows and APP's etc.

Biohazard · 31 Dec 2007 at 13:52

So would you say that it is worth it then?

Considering I am making a jump from IDE - SATA, with only a performance view not that of storage?

Duke · 31 Dec 2007 at 14:16

I'd rather spend half the amount on a decent 7200 drive.

Biohazard · 31 Dec 2007 at 14:23

Would I see better performance with 7200's RAID 0 for the cost then?

helmutcheese · 31 Dec 2007 at 14:47

Cost and space are no issue to you get the Raptor 16MB, remember it could not be touched at launch but thats 2 years this March (AFAIR).

zetec452 · 31 Dec 2007 at 14:50

Biohazard said:
Would I see better performance with 7200's RAID 0 for the cost then?

Not really as it is most likely that the onboard RAID on your motherboard will be the bottle neck in the system. Plus you have twice the change of losing your data.

Atom · 31 Dec 2007 at 15:24

I had a 7200.10 for os and then went to a 74gb Raptor. Really pleased with it, so much I bought another one for raid0..

Would never go back to a 'normal' drive again.

helmutcheese · 31 Dec 2007 at 15:33

Me too but Raptor X's as new from launch

.

JackRegan · 31 Dec 2007 at 15:33

I've had all 3 size raptors for my OS's and tried various alternatives but always gone back to a Raptor.

Yes they do run a little hot, they can be a little noisy when seeking and by todays standard limited on space, but their speed makes them an ideal OS drive.

Humate · 31 Dec 2007 at 17:44

helmutcheese said:
Cost and space are no issue to you get the Raptor 16MB, remember it could not be touched at launch but thats 2 years this March (AFAIR).

such a long time

its about time they bought out a new raptor range.

easyrider · 31 Dec 2007 at 18:12

JackRegan said:
.

Yes they do run a little hot, they can be a little noisy when seeking and by todays standard limited on space, but their speed makes them an ideal OS drive.

Totally agree

BobBrainy · 1 Jan 2008 at 06:57

im in the same situation, however inpractical the raptor seems it is faster for games but after having my 74gb one for a few years now its even moreso inpractical whereas a large space drive could convert to storage this one is just too small now and ill probably have to sell it.

but none the less, should i go for say seagate 7200.11 32mb cache 500gb drive or a 150gb raptor x? The price of the raptor is double, the performance however isn't right? Also I saw a post here saying bad things about the seagate, is it true that the cache isnt reported properly?

analog · 1 Jan 2008 at 08:06

I will tell you if i notice any difference from one 500gig drive to two 74gig raptors in RAID0 when i get them...damn post.

Adam_D200 · 1 Jan 2008 at 13:19

I'm planning on getting a pair of nice quiet samsung 500gb drives and putting them in RAID 0. My QNAP NAS keeps all the important files nice and safe

Vir · 1 Jan 2008 at 13:33

getting a dell oem 80GB raptor soon, I'll post my findings when I have it

helmutcheese · 1 Jan 2008 at 13:34

As Topic £10, 000 is a lot of money for a HDD.

JackRegan · 1 Jan 2008 at 15:01

Vir said:
getting a dell oem 80GB raptor soon, I'll post my findings when I have it

IIRC are they the 8mb cache version?

gazfocus · 1 Jan 2008 at 15:26

I've just sold my Raptors as I've replaced 2 74GB 8MB Raptors with a Samsung 500GB with 32MB Cache (although not tried the samsung yet). Do you think I'll notice much difference?

p.s my 2 Raptors were running in RAID 0

helmutcheese · 1 Jan 2008 at 15:28

Yes as the 8MB Raptors are slow by todays standards.