Raptor? Yay or nay?

tsj · 24 Mar 2007 at 23:12

Shall I get a 36GB 8mb 10krpm Raptor?

Or a 320GB Seagate .10 drive?

or?

Cody · 24 Mar 2007 at 23:33

I got the 16mb cache version for o/s and 160MB WD 16mb cache for storage, one thing to remember is that the raptor is noisier than your average hard drive.

tsj · 24 Mar 2007 at 23:34

Cody said:
I got the 16mb cache version for o/s and 160MB WD 16mb cache for storage, one thing to remember is that the raptor is noisier than your average hard drive.

ah. storage is needed for me anyway so i was thinking maybe getting a 500gb for now and getting another 500gb later for raid.

The Laughing Ma · 25 Mar 2007 at 00:50

I read this in a magazine the guy was asking weather he would be better off getting Raid, a faster HD (a raptor basically) or just go for maximum storage.

The answer was simple and quite effective.

Would you rather spend 5 seconds less loading your level of FEAR or your OS or would you rather have triple the storage space for the same price.

tsj · 25 Mar 2007 at 00:58

The Laughing Ma said:
I read this in a magazine the guy was asking weather he would be better off getting Raid, a faster HD (a raptor basically) or just go for maximum storage.

The answer was simple and quite effective.

Would you rather spend 5 seconds less loading your level of FEAR or your OS or would you rather have triple the storage space for the same price.

5 seconds is a long time if u think about it? Thats 1680 seconds per year!

Ak!ta · 25 Mar 2007 at 02:25

Id rather have a raptor for windows/games and then a decent size HDD for storage....

tsj · 25 Mar 2007 at 04:21

I was thinking of getting the 36gb to do just that.,.. but then i read that 7200.10 are almost as fast as anyway... therefore it wouldn't make sense for me to pay silly amounts for just a small amount of space.

Nelly · 25 Mar 2007 at 05:56

tsj said:
I was thinking of getting the 36gb to do just that.,.. but then i read that 7200.10 are almost as fast as anyway... therefore it wouldn't make sense for me to pay silly amounts for just a small amount of space.

I'm not sure how loud the 36GB Raptor is, but the 74GB Raptor is ever so loud when seeking, I have a 150GB Raptor & that is abit better in terms of speed & slightly quieter.

I've just upgraded to 2 Seagate 500GB 7200.10's & I'm more than happy - quiet & fast.

jellybeard999 · 25 Mar 2007 at 06:34

The 36gb 8mb Raptor is :

Noisier
No faster
Smaller

Not got much going for it tbh, nor do any of them IMO, too expensive for what they are. If you MUST have a Raptor, dont consider any except the 150gb.

chaparral · 25 Mar 2007 at 09:12

The Laughing Ma said:
Would you rather spend 5 seconds less loading your level of FEAR or your OS or would you rather have triple the storage space for the same price.

But you got remember that less loading time/copying time/installing/uninstalling time etc for everything.(I.E check mail,open webpage,start nero,install app/game etc)

I RMA my 150mb raptor last month,and i hated using a standard harddrive while waiting for the replacement raptor to come back,after being so used to using the raptor for a year..

The Harddrive is just about the slower component in a PC,So i would go for the fastest one you can afford...

Rambaud · 25 Mar 2007 at 09:33

Sold my 74Gb Raptors (RAID0) over a year ago, and have never been tempted to replace them.

Too noisey, and too pricey for the size.

Tarty · 25 Mar 2007 at 09:44

two or three aaks drives in raid would smoke raptor...

Massive Attack · 25 Mar 2007 at 11:16

Tarty said:
two or three aaks drives in raid would smoke raptor...

not on access time

easyrider · 25 Mar 2007 at 12:06

I have a 150 GIG raptor as my windows drive.Its in a silentmaxx enclosure and its silent.

I have just got used to it now and will always use one as my boot drive.

I have now partitioned it into two 75 gig chunks.

One for XP and the other for Vista.

tsj · 25 Mar 2007 at 13:10

easyrider said:
I have a 150 GIG raptor as my windows drive.Its in a silentmaxx enclosure and its silent.

I have just got used to it now and will always use one as my boot drive.

I have now partitioned it into two 75 gig chunks.

One for XP and the other for Vista.

Sounds good mate... But i think I may go for 2x 500gb or 2x 320gb seagates and go raid 0

Cyber-Mav · 25 Mar 2007 at 14:11

Cody said:
I got the 16mb cache version for o/s and 160MB WD 16mb cache for storage, one thing to remember is that the raptor is noisier than your average hard drive.

i can vouch on the noise.

easyrider · 25 Mar 2007 at 14:55

tsj said:
Sounds good mate... But i think I may go for 2x 500gb or 2x 320gb seagates and go raid 0

Thats a lot of data to lose if one of the drives goes **** up :eek:

Or if the array errors

easyrider · 25 Mar 2007 at 14:56

Cyber-Mav said:
i can vouch on the noise.

In a silentmaxx enclosure I can't hear mine

drak3 · 25 Mar 2007 at 14:57

or if the controller dies, or if the bios dies, or or .. stay away from raid 0 with 3 digit gig setups please!

easyrider · 25 Mar 2007 at 15:08

Raid 0 is good as a windows setup with say two 80gig seagates.

All you loose is the installation.

However for storing data raid 0 is pointless.

The only way a raid 0 setup is good for storage is when having say two 500 gig drives in raid 0 as a scratch disk when editing for temp video files.