Samsung SpinPoint vs Raptor X 150

Associate
Joined
26 Oct 2007
Posts
1,932
Location
Death Star or Mount Doom, it depends on the day.
I need an additional hardrive as I only have 74gb and it goes know where. I only do gaming and I was considering getting a another raptor as they are awesome. Although my Bro said that these are a good alternative, well cheaper and are as fast as the Raptor. Any views!
 
Only advantage of a Raptor is low access times which make a small difference to opening programs and boot times, a Samsung F1 or any other recent SATA2 (SATA 3Gb/s if you're a pedant) will have faster transfer rates so it will load most games a little bit quicker. And of course you'll also get: more space, less noise, less heat and less power consumption.
 
Only advantage of a Raptor is low access times which make a small difference to opening programs and boot times, a Samsung F1 or any other recent SATA2 (SATA 3Gb/s if you're a pedant) will have faster transfer rates so it will load most games a little bit quicker. And of course you'll also get: more space, less noise, less heat and less power consumption.

Rubbish!!

Low RA makes a massive difference to the OS because it is constantly accessing very small files, hence why an OS running on a 15k U320 Drive or a SSD/iRAM flys and boots in a matter of a few seconds.
I would never go back to 7.2k for my OS & Program partitions and find it really annoying when I use other peoples computers as they feel really sluggish in comparison!!
 
I think its a matter of user experience. I want a raptor soon(74gb, 16mb cache one)........ anyone willing to sell?
 
I would get the 150. The 74 is just too small. I have a Vista Install here and im around 80Gigs space used. (ot of steam games, all documents are saved on my home server).
 
There are new raptors coming out aren't there? I would be looking at one of those, low access times + more data with current generation perpendicular recording and data density would equal some seriously mean drives.
 
Supposed to be (Slackworth knows more) 15k rpm (I think) 300Gb, 2.5" drives SATAII. Be next year before anything happens. I think he mentioned reliability issues. Basically, still in development.
 
Supposed to be (Slackworth knows more) 15k rpm (I think) 300Gb, 2.5" drives SATAII. Be next year before anything happens. I think he mentioned reliability issues. Basically, still in development.

I'd wager the noise and vibration is going to be horrendous... :(
 
Vista ultimate is miles faster on a 32MB cache Samsung than the Raptor (I made the expensive mistake of getting a Raptor 150 a few months ago-sold it at a big loss to get the Samsung).

Vista flies along with the Samsung but the Raptor feels a lot slower.

Under XP however, the reverse is true & the Raptor is much faster with the Samsung feeling a little sluggish.

I should imagine that Vista file sizes are larger which is why the 32Mb cache appears to make a big difference.
 
That would also be sort of ideal i suppose, maybe a big archive file would be the best, i mean the access time wouldn't matter and the 100MB/s or so would load it in no time.

Wonder why microsoft didn't do this?
 
Back
Top Bottom