WD Raptor Return - Nice

accod · 5 Sep 2009 at 16:40

Had a Raptor X die on me a couple of weeks ago. Returned it to WD and just got an email from them saying the replacement has been sent out... a WD3000HLFS. Looks like I'm getting a 300GB velociraptor

Here's hoping. Now I need my other Raptor X to die

I've been lucky with hdd returns. Last one was a 500GB Seagate and I got back a 750GB.

Hairybudda · 5 Sep 2009 at 16:49

You should forget about the raptor and see if you can do this to your seagate

Seek times are a little worse but pure throughput the seagate canes the 300gb raptor!

Rroff · 5 Sep 2009 at 17:30

Its not really worth it... you have to sacrifice several orders of magnitude on capacity for a small decrease in seek times...

Might be slightly more feasible with a 1.5Tb @ 500gb per platter - but it really wasn't worth it on my 500gig 7200.12.

AbsenceJam · 6 Sep 2009 at 02:51

Hairybudda said:
You should forget about the raptor and see if you can do this to your seagate

Seek times are a little worse but pure throughput the seagate canes the 300gb raptor!

That article is so stupid because you can achieve the same through partitioning....

accod · 6 Sep 2009 at 09:47

Hairybudda said:
You should forget about the raptor and see if you can do this to your seagate

Lol so you're telling me that if you had a velociraptor, you wouldn't use it. True, the sustained transfer isn't great any more but the seek times still make a difference, especially for the OS. Quite a speed up from my 2006 Raptor X and for free.

AbsenceJam · 6 Sep 2009 at 11:04

accod said:
Lol so you're telling me that if you had a velociraptor, you wouldn't use it. True, the sustained transfer isn't great any more but the seek times still make a difference, especially for the OS. Quite a speed up from my 2006 Raptor X and for free.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18033323

No, I wouldn't. It's just throwing away disk space, when you can simply partition - not that you'd notice the difference outside of benchmarks.

Rroff · 6 Sep 2009 at 11:12

Partitioning only works if you rarely use the extra space and you have to make sure the partition is all on the correct part of teh disc.

AbsenceJam · 6 Sep 2009 at 12:24

Rroff said:
Partitioning only works if you rarely use the extra space and you have to make sure the partition is all on the correct part of teh disc.

No it works exactly the same way, plus you have all that extra space for anything else which is nearly as fast. First partition is quickest, easy.

Undesirable · 6 Sep 2009 at 23:56

I have 2 dead Western Digital Raptor X. They died several months in-between each other, and were originally in a Raid-0 configuration. They both died in exactly the same way, OS locked up and click of death. Restart and OS starts to load but click of death just before reaching Windows. I won't return them in case any sensitive data can be salvaged by someone. No bad sectors or SMART warning before they died. My HD graveyard is steadily growing.

accod · 7 Sep 2009 at 11:54

Mine were in a raid 0 array too. Only one has failed so far. PC crashed, rebooted it, reported dead drive and obviously wouldn't boot. The drive doesn't even spin up, its completely dead. Tried the molex power connector thinking that might work but no luck.

With Raid0 at least the drives only contain part of your data and would be harder for someone to recover. If you sent back one drive at a time you'd minimise the risk.

Guest2 · 7 Sep 2009 at 15:09

Ive had a better return. I had a lacie 500gb external drive, i plugged in the wrong power supply when drunk (a laptop supply) and it fried the drive. I took it out and returned it western digital and was sent a 750gb one for my troubles! excellent service