Raptor or RAID-0 7200s?

Sarduk

Sarduk

Sarduk

Permabanned
Joined
25 Mar 2007
Posts
1,784
Hi all,

I do not fully understand the performance gains of two hard drives in RAID-0; is the only advantage that you have (theoretically) double the bandwidth?

How would two well performing 7200s in RAID-0 compare to one 10,000 Raptor?

Best,
 
You gain about 60% in real terms, 2x 55MB/Sec HDD's wont get you 110MB/Sec, more like 90MB/Sec if your lucky.

As a Raptor has very fast seek it will beat a far slower seeking 7200rpm HDD and more so as 2 7200's in Raid0 will have slower seek again.
 
Last edited:
Reread please I made typo, Raid0 will have slower seek as the 2 drives add together, but 2 Raptors in Raid0 should still seek faster than 1 7200rpm HDD
 
I doubt it will be near that speed, the new WD claimed 95MB/s but bench marks show the average to be about 75MB/s.
 
Given that the new Raptor X (150gb) is only getting around 70mb/s average (Here - page 7) I'd still stand by my statement - when they arrive (now delayed unfortunately :( ) The new seagates (7200.11) will be 'quicker' and cheaper. ;)

(Since the Raptor claims 80mb/s that means just on the claimed numbers the Seagate is 25% faster sustained transfer :eek: )
 
Last edited:
cavemanoc said:
Given that the new Raptor X (150gb) is only getting around 70mb/s average (Here - page 7) I'd still stand by my statement - when they arrive (now delayed unfortunately :( ) The new seagates (7200.11) will be 'quicker' and cheaper. ;)

(Since the Raptor claims 80mb/s that means just on the claimed numbers the Seagate is 25% faster sustained transfer :eek: )
Click to expand...
Even with regards to seek time?
 
I dont go by reviews, I have Raptors so know what they do, the 74GiG 16MB ones are even faster.

Right now today 16th July 2007, there is no other EIDE or SATA HDD of any spindle speed that can beat a Raptor esp in seek, if the above and the new WD do get 95MB-105MB I will be very,very suprised as of spindle speeds, but they aint out so above still stands as of today.
 
Last edited:
helmutcheese said:
I dont go by reviews, I have Raptors so know what they do, the 74GiG 16MB ones are even faster.

Right now today 16th July 2007, there is no other EIDE or SATA HDD of any spindle speed that can beat a Raptor esp in seek, if the above and the new WD do get 95MB-105MB I will be very,very suprised as of spindle speeds, but they aint out so above still stands as of today.
Click to expand...

This is true - but it's arguable whether they are worth the money, for considerably less you can build a far larger array of WD AAKS or Seagate 7200.10s that will perform to nearly the same level. Were you to spend the same amount on the 7200 rpm as you did on an array of Raptors I guarantee I could build a faster system out of the AAKS or Seagates + Hardware Raid Card.

Not sure how the new 150gb Raptor X fits in, but there are few here, now who can justify the cost of the Raptors (32/74 Gb) :)

EDIT:
Having said all that - I'll be selling my Scsi setup soon if you want to find out what real speed is... :D
 
Last edited:
I am not even taking price into it, as there is costly GPU's and CPU's, they still sell and someone will always want them, and I would not want SCSI in any case for various reasons inc cost and size (how many people have a 66MHZ slot in mobo anyhow to get past PCI's 133MB/Sec bottleneck, SATA600 will be here next, it was suppose to be sometime in 2007, suppose no point till drives get faster.

I have 2 Raptor X's now 300GiG is enough for anyone to have on PC at any 1 time, even if Video work you should be backing up to external HDD's anyhow, so no way would I want 500-1000GB with many 7200rpm drives in Raid cause again the same number fo Raptors would again be faster.

Everything I said is true today. :), time will tell.
 
Last edited:
helmutcheese said:
I am not even taking price into it, as there is costly GPU's and CPU's, they still sell and someone will always want them, and I would not want SCSI in any case for various reasons inc cost and size (how many people have a 66MHZ slot in mobo anyhow to get past PCI's 133MB/Sec bottleneck
Click to expand...

Pci-e has been the standard for high-end controllers for a while now - for the reason you suggested - bottleneck - most of us do have a spare pci-e slot.

helmutcheese said:
SATA600 will be here next, it was suppose to be sometime in 2007, suppose no point till drives get faster
Click to expand...

Correct - with 300mb/s (ish) available on Sata 2 there is little need for an upgrade yet - Only a controller card will allow you to test these limits.

helmutcheese said:
I have 2 Raptor X's now 300GiG is enough for anyone to have on PC at any 1 time, even if Video work you should be backing up to external HDD's anyhow, so no way would I want 500-1000GB with many 7200rpm drives in Raid cause again the same number fo Raptors would again be faster.
Click to expand...

Utter tosh tbh. With Vista, a couple of full install games, an Office Suite, music and Videos we're seeing 500Gb eaten up in no time - you *could* trim it down - but if you don't have to, why hastle?

Arrays - I don't follow - Yes, 2*Raptor X in a Raid 0 would be faster than 2*7200.10s in a Raid 0 - a little harsh comparing them that way - a Ferrari will get you from London to Edinburgh faster than a Transit van - but which one will get your luggage there quicker?

Your array cost a smidge under £300, for £25 more you could build a 5 disk Raid 5 array of 500Gb WD AAKS - that gives you 2Tb of storage, redundancy, speed and quiet. I know which I'd buy (In fact, when the new 7200.11s come out I know what I will be buying!)


helmutcheese said:
Everything I said is true today. :), time will tell.
Click to expand...

Meh - It's not about 'true', it's about relative value. You will always get diminishing returns on bleeding edge performance - up to each of us to decide what balance we want between value for money and performance.

EDIT:

Oh yes: just say no to unnecessary apostrophes!

helmutcheese said:
GPU's and CPU's
Click to expand...
PandaSaysNo.thumbnail.jpg
 
Last edited:
Are you really so low you need to correct grammar on a web forum, you some kind of Grammar Police here ? (you last edited in comment). :mad:

PCI-E bus is here now but back when it was not it was the PCI bus and there was still SCSI users and they needed a 66mhz slot to get full speed. (Asus mobos had them). :)

And to say Im talking tosh, you obv dont have a clue about Vista, it takes about 10GB of space, then office lets say my complete set of discs from MS give it another 20GB to be really over the top, thats 30GB, then games on dual layer DVD extracted to say 10GB each (again over the top), you have more than enough with 300GB, nevermind 500GB, you must have a lot of Blu RAY GayPr0n on your PC thats all I can say. :p

My posts was fair and stated some facts and some guys agreed, does not matter if current or not for SCSI part, many have PCI SCSI cards, your input did little but correct a few grammar points of mines, you would be better to say nothing.

There is enough "Raptors are not needed threads on here".
 
The benchmark results of the Seagate is good, but outputting 28-34dB during seek? No thanks!

The Raptor tops at 27dB during seek (at 1meter for both of them, stats from silentpcreview.com).

I think I may just go back to basics with a good old Western Digital :confused:
 
My Raptor seeks bit faster and louder and I turned of the Achostic Management function, also helps as case mounts drives in rubber so takes bit of noise away, I dont hope to be on these forever, there will be new Raptors someday.

I aint here to sell Raptors but aint gonna justify my purchase either, I do not mind constructive comments good or bad but not some "cough cough" picking up my grammar on a web forum, if that all he can do I can ignore him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom