velociraptor query

mikeo

mikeo

mikeo

Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2005
Posts
2,828
Location
SW Scotland
As like a lot of folks, I pre-ordered Windows 7 months ago. So with "that date" fast approaching, I need to sort out a new drive to support my OS and main apps. My current Hitachi drive is a few years old and transfer speeds are not too brilliant (IE. around 40 MBps). So...

Was thinking about an SSD but have now decided to wait a while before jumping on that particular bandwagon (IE. prices high, availabilty for the best drives low, firmware still in a state of flux).

So am now thinking about a 150GB Velociraptor. Now I know they are nowhere as fast as an SSD, but cheaper price would allow me to purchase a quad core CPU as well. And this might be a better balanced upgrade.

My main query is about reliability. I had sort of assumed as phrases like "enterprise standard", "high MTBF" are thrown around when talking about these drives. That they would be ultra reliable. But have since seen a couple of posts saying there is a high failure rate for these drives?

Question.. What are other forum members opinion on this (particularly people that have owned raptors)???

Thanks.

PS. Maybe I'be been lucky, but in the last 15 years (from a home PC point of view) can't remember the last HD (of any make) that I've had fail. Currently running one Hitachi and two Samsung.
 
I have a 300Gb one, and it did have to be RMA's as when reinstalling Vista, something happened and it password protected itself. No idea why, but they replaced it. I would not swop it for any other hard drive, and SSD's dont have the space I require yet. WD drives are always my first choice!
 
I was thinking about a Velociraptor for a while. But I think I'm going to go for a WD Black instead. More capacity for less, and as I understand it, the Blacks are getting close to Velociraptor drives in some things.

Is the extra money really worth the speed? I would also be interested to know. Sorry to hijack the thread mikeo. Just want to know the same as you.
 
I got my 150gb VR off members market for £60. After you have used one going back to a 'normal' drive is so slow.
 
And the 1Tb WD Black will make an excellent Storage drive after you goto SSD as well.

The Vraptors are a bit small for storage drives after putting an SSD in.
 
O'dear... Yet more options!

The WD6401AALS is only around £50!!! Wonder what in "real terms" the difference is in everyday use compared to the Velociraptor? Tine for yet more digging on GOOGLE.
 
mdjmcnally said:
And the 1Tb WD Black will make an excellent Storage drive after you goto SSD as well.

The Vraptors are a bit small for storage drives after putting an SSD in.
Click to expand...

You have a very good point there. So I'm jst off to order a WD black. That way, save some more money and put towards either a new quad core, or a new graphics card.

Thanks everyone.
 
wd black is oldschool, i wouldnt buy one at this point. Look at samsung f3 series or other 500gb platter drives.

(i have a WD black right now btw, it's a good drive but getting dated)
 
gurusan said:
wd black is oldschool, i wouldnt buy one at this point. Look at samsung f3 series or other 500gb platter drives.

(i have a WD black right now btw, it's a good drive but getting dated)
Click to expand...

Too late... just ordered a WD Black 640MB from OcUK
 
Well... WD black arrived, So stuck it in current system and formatted it, so that I could run a quick test. And what can I say, pretty impressed! Had not realised how much quicker HD's had become in the last couple of years:

CDmark01.jpg


PS. Current C: drive is a Samsung 160JJ
 
Stonedofmoo

While I agree with you and have in fact looked at the very article that you point to. There was more to my decission than just "speed". At some point (like half the world I suspect), I shall purchase an SSD for my boot drive and retire the current drive for storage and the V/raptor's just don't have the space to make this a sensible option. Dial other factors in like price and I think I made the right choice in the end. As nice as the v/raptor's are.

Also gave me some money left over to purchase a quad core CPU.
 
Just to prove that "I'm not a man of my word".... I've gone and bought a 150GB Velociraptor as well! Not too sure it was worth the money, but now it's set up as my boot drive, rather than the WD black 640GB... things do "seem" slightly quicker (could just be imagination I suppose).

Another comparison:

crystaldiskmark-1.jpg


Not "that much" in it really. Though appreciate Crystaldiskmark only tests a very limited set of things.

PS. Top one is the velociraptor, bottom one the WD black 640GB
 
and here's what HD Tune says:

HDtune-1.jpg


As a side issue. Tried to use Windows 7 to clone the WD black to the Raptor. But no way would the Windows recover utility, recover the image that I took of the WD black, to the Raptor. The partition image seemed like it was locked to the WD black (IE. it appeared to be looking for another WD black 640GB to load the partition image to)! Strange.

Gave up and upgraded my Acronis True Image from 2009, to 2010 for Windows 7 compatibility and used this to clone the drive. Always liked True Image. The range of backups etc. that you can do is genuinely impressive (well it is to me).
 
Last edited:
I thought the VR was meant to have faster access. Knocking just over 4ms off doesn't seem that great.

Around first generation of SSD's I was considering a VR for a single drive solution because of the extra storage space over an SSD, while being quicker to access than the 7200rpm models. But will probably follow Kingston's advice and eventually get a SSD for OS and maybe a single game install at a time, and retire the mechanical drive to storage and swap file.
 
mikeo said:
As a side issue. Tried to use Windows 7 to clone the WD black to the Raptor. But no way would the Windows recover utility, recover the image that I took of the WD black, to the Raptor. The partition image seemed like it was locked to the WD black (IE. it appeared to be looking for another WD black 640GB to load the partition image to)! Strange.

Gave up and upgraded my Acronis True Image from 2009, to 2010 for Windows 7 compatibility and used this to clone the drive. Always liked True Image. The range of backups etc. that you can do is genuinely impressive (well it is to me).
Click to expand...

It's because you were trying to restore to a smaller partition, even a lot of commercial tools fail on this amazingly.
 
AbsenceJam

Interesting.

You would think it would actually check how much data there was "actually" to restore! (like Acronis True Image does).

Not too worried... As I was thinking about upgrading to the latest version of true Image anyway. Just had not got round to it at that point in time and wondered if Windows 7 could "do the business"... obviously not!

Now I can get down to the "real reason" for a half decent PC... yes... games.

Installed The Witcher and looks OK. Lets hope it runs OK. Not too sure about the latest Nvidia drivers though! (IE. 191.07). We shall see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom