raptors misleading?

smeghead666

smeghead666

smeghead666

Associate
Joined
27 Dec 2006
Posts
104
Location
Chester
read a few posts here and a few reviews about the WD raptor (150GB).

im about to make a new build, and was considering getting a raptor for windows 7 and games (+some development tools) and a caviar black for everyhting else.

from what i'v read mostly in benches, it seems that the black outperforms the raptor...is this the case, and thus would it be a silly idea to get a raptor?
 
Vraptors are quicker, but for the price i just don't think they are justified. They are also as noisy as circa windows 98 hard drives :p

Id still say get 2 cav blacks, for the price and performance you cant go wrong. (5 Year WD warranty to boot!)
 
well i was going for the TB black.

so its a smarter move raid0-ing 2 caviar blacks rarther than getting a seperate raptor (or even velociraptor) drive?

was quite looking forward to having a dedicated drive for OS and games, but if it turns out to not be that much better then to hell with it lol

Edit: OH my bad, just realised the difference btween raptor and vraptor...i should have mentionoed in the top post that i was looking at a 150GB VelociRaptor
 
Last edited:
My Velociraptor isnt noisy, nor was it expensive - £75. In fact, its a lot less noisy than all my other drives.


Ignore the cpu usage, i had something running in the background. Usually its 1%

hdtune.jpg
 
well i was origonaly going for this for my games / OS but too many people keep telling me SSD's havent quite been perfected yet so i started looking at the Velociraptor but i dont want to buy a HDD thinking its going to improve performance, when it acctualy makes no difference ?!?
 
smeghead666 said:
well i was origonaly going for this for my games / OS but too many people keep telling me SSD's havent quite been perfected yet so i started looking at the Velociraptor but i dont want to buy a HDD thinking its going to improve performance, when it acctualy makes no difference ?!?
Click to expand...

They arn't perfected yet, but even at their worst the Crucial M225's are still leagues ahead of mechanical drives.

I've had a RAID0 raptor setup and my Intel X25-M 80GB is miles better. It's a night and day difference.
And then theres the blessed, blissful silence, My Raptors were horribly noisy when seeking. The 3am defrag used to be loud enough to wake me up.
 
Last edited:
Have to say that my new Intel SSD leaves my old 150G Raptor for dead. Imaged the raptor onto it a couple of days ago and it's like having a new machine.

Never found that raptors are particularly fast compared to more modern disks like the sammys.

Cheers

Richard
 
Mrjobby said:
Would a new sammy F3 not run any of the raptors into the ground?
Click to expand...

It's all about seek times. Raptors are roughly twice as fast in this regard. This quickly becomes telling once you have any multitasking or small file operations going on.
SSD's are orders of magnitude faster than even Raptors when it comes to seek times.
 
I got 4x 80GB Velociraptors running in RAID0 - Cost me £280 via a friend in the US.

298GB of the fastest speeds I've ever (personally) seen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom