why get a raptor when you can buy an SCSI drive for similar if not less money ?
- Thread starter locutus12
- Start date
(if you want a decent one that is)
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 1,210
- Location
- Liverpool
I believe Raptors give better real-world performance than 10k rpm SCSIs for gaming and general desktop use. SCSIs are better for servers.
15,000 rpm SCSIs will beat Raptors at pretty much anything, but are much more expensive.
And the price of a good controller card is always a factor.
15,000 rpm SCSIs will beat Raptors at pretty much anything, but are much more expensive.
And the price of a good controller card is always a factor.
Paying attention has it spot on really.
I got one of my rigs setup with SCSI only, and comparing one bare 10k scsi drive against the Raptor, the Raptor beats it hands down for general use.
Where the SCSI starts to beat the raptor, is when you are both reading and writing from many apps / sources, then the SCSI gets good.
15K SCSI's on the other hand are faster, and those beat the Raptor.
Again, the Card is a factor too! - nearly all Mobos these days have SATA built in so the Raptor will play off the bat, but you still need a SCSI card to play with SCSI drives... To be honest, its been quite a while since I saw a mobo with SCSI on board and even then, it was the old 50pin jobs, and even the best SCSI Drives wont reach Raptor speeds on those!
However, if you want serious speeds that no Raptor setup can compete with, then you are lookign at BIGBUX with a SCSI RAID setup.
Oh, and just for you to note...
Dotn assume that just cos its a raptor, that its going to be a mega quick machine, cos its not.
Almost any SATA HD these days are fairly nippy, and you wont really notice any difference in speed between a Raptor and any other Sata HD.
My first SATA was a Raptor that my mate InsanCen gave me ( Hiya mate ). He gave it me cos he was not impressed with it considering its price, and I also found it to be a bit lacking considering the hype.
My No2 SATA was an 80GB Seagate and I found the seagate was quicker with larger files and the Raptor was quicker atlots of little files, but they were pretty much on par apart from that... Plus of course the Seagate was half the price.
I have since bought a second Raptor, but only for RAIDing tests and I have not been impressed with that either with my Seagates once again, being faster, and have no intention of wasting that much money again.
I got one of my rigs setup with SCSI only, and comparing one bare 10k scsi drive against the Raptor, the Raptor beats it hands down for general use.
Where the SCSI starts to beat the raptor, is when you are both reading and writing from many apps / sources, then the SCSI gets good.
15K SCSI's on the other hand are faster, and those beat the Raptor.
Again, the Card is a factor too! - nearly all Mobos these days have SATA built in so the Raptor will play off the bat, but you still need a SCSI card to play with SCSI drives... To be honest, its been quite a while since I saw a mobo with SCSI on board and even then, it was the old 50pin jobs, and even the best SCSI Drives wont reach Raptor speeds on those!
However, if you want serious speeds that no Raptor setup can compete with, then you are lookign at BIGBUX with a SCSI RAID setup.
Oh, and just for you to note...
Dotn assume that just cos its a raptor, that its going to be a mega quick machine, cos its not.
Almost any SATA HD these days are fairly nippy, and you wont really notice any difference in speed between a Raptor and any other Sata HD.
My first SATA was a Raptor that my mate InsanCen gave me ( Hiya mate ). He gave it me cos he was not impressed with it considering its price, and I also found it to be a bit lacking considering the hype.
My No2 SATA was an 80GB Seagate and I found the seagate was quicker with larger files and the Raptor was quicker atlots of little files, but they were pretty much on par apart from that... Plus of course the Seagate was half the price.
I have since bought a second Raptor, but only for RAIDing tests and I have not been impressed with that either with my Seagates once again, being faster, and have no intention of wasting that much money again.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 8,243
- Location
- North East
The thing to remember, is SCSI is OLD... 10k SCSI drives have improved a LOT, and new 10k SCSI are a lot faster than old 10K SCSI, some 10k drives are slower than 7.2k SATA, whereas a new one will be raptor esque 
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 1,908
- Location
- Stafford
14 scsi drives in raid 5 for less than £150 (oh yes doubles up as room heater as well)
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 1,908
- Location
- Stafford
Not mine, got it off a project site. Those are 50gb 2nd hand scsis bought off e-bay. Probably from a sever upgrade or something. Heat was a major problem for the guy, and can u imagine the noise. Also requires its own 450w psu.
450w for all those drives says its got to be a good PSU.
MY SCSI System only has 6 drives and requires a good 500 or better ( cheap and nasty 500w jobs like QTEC or COLORSIT just dont cut it ) although its only got a pair of 80mms blowing over them, thats enough to keep temps down... Swicth the fans off and it hangs in about 10 minutes with the drives being too hot to touch without getting hurt )
MY SCSI System only has 6 drives and requires a good 500 or better ( cheap and nasty 500w jobs like QTEC or COLORSIT just dont cut it ) although its only got a pair of 80mms blowing over them, thats enough to keep temps down... Swicth the fans off and it hangs in about 10 minutes with the drives being too hot to touch without getting hurt )