Sorry...another Raptor thread.

Atom · 19 Feb 2007 at 13:54

I recently built a new system using a Seagate 7200.10 250GB hd, didn't use a Raptor due to posts on ocuk regarding noise. I am now considering a 74gb Raptor and Silentmaxx enclosure again for OS and games to hopefully make it more snappy and the Seagate for storage.

I understand OS will load quicker plus some games etc but I can't find any information as to the difference in 8ms for the Raptor or 13ms for the Seagate. Is there a simple way to explain the speed increase for seek time, rather than XP loads quicker? How much quicker does it load?

Kaiju · 20 Feb 2007 at 03:47

Atom said:
I recently built a new system using a Seagate 7200.10 250GB hd, didn't use a Raptor due to posts on ocuk regarding noise. I am now considering a 74gb Raptor and Silentmaxx enclosure again for OS and games to hopefully make it more snappy and the Seagate for storage.

I understand OS will load quicker plus some games etc but I can't find any information as to the difference in 8ms for the Raptor or 13ms for the Seagate. Is there a simple way to explain the speed increase for seek time, rather than XP loads quicker? How much quicker does it load?

A quicker seek time means files can be accessed faster. The greater the difference, the snappier files will open up.

Not much more too it really unless you want to go into the technical side of things.

silversurfer · 20 Feb 2007 at 03:52

5ms difference so presumably if you had to open a thousand files you would save 5 secs. Im not sure how many files are opened during a normal windows startup, quite a few but probably less then 1000

Atom · 21 Feb 2007 at 08:22

ok thanks

I dont need more storage so I think I will try one as I won't be happy till I do!!

800ster · 21 Feb 2007 at 09:22

I've both a recent 74GB raptor and a 7200.10 350GB - both are whisper quiet so I would not bother with any enclosure. There is little real world difference but I guess you are like me and have to give it a go!

Meatball · 21 Feb 2007 at 21:45

I'm interested in buying a 74Gb raptor off the MM but it's the 8mb version. Is there much of a performance loss vs the newer 16mb versions?

silversurfer · 21 Feb 2007 at 21:54

Without being specific, cache generally gives a depreciating return as it increases in size. 16mb will not be twice as effective as 8mb, its probably more like 10% or less increased chances of a cache hit. So if it was 10% overall chance with 8mb, 16mb would be like 11%. With cheap memory they figured why not but I wouldnt worry about it unless theres some other difference

The rough answer is no, not much difference