VelociRaptor....does not dissapoint!

[Stilletto]

Well, it just stupid fast, that's about all I can say. All of this with a 7ms access time is just wicked.
I am really loving this drive so far.

[eliteoneXP]

awesome! I have 2 of these bad boys coming to me tomorrow with the rest of my new parts. Going to raid 0 em up, cant wait!

[Krypto]

Well, it just stupid fast, that's about all I can say. All of this with a 7ms access time is just wicked.
I am really loving this drive so far.

Bah! I cant run HD Tach on Vista 64 :bang head

[Ashura]

Bah! I cant run HD Tach on Vista 64 :bang head

Try running it in compatibility mode.

[prime81]

Not bad for one drive, I may havta invest!

[Quick69GTO]

Yep. Same here. I may have to invest in two of them.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136260
It will be an expensive investment.

[chawks2]

Bah! I cant run HD Tach on Vista 64 :bang head

Huh? I have no problem running it on x64 Vista. :confused:

[ou_phidelt]

Try running it in compatibility mode.

That will work, at least it does for me.

[Stilletto]

That will work, at least it does for me.

That's what I did for the Screen Shot...it does work:beer:

[boarderjw]

very hot. i wish i could afford a couple.

[EmAn]

matrix raid 5 :drool:

[Stilletto]

matrix raid 5 :drool:

Good lord...that would sound like a Raptor for sure.....

Oddly enough, the temps on this drive are almost 8C lower than my previous raptors(150gb), but the drive is a little louder. But still, the performance is unreal for one single drive. I have felt a much greater improvement from going from my 150 raptor to this than I ever got from a raid setup.

[Vengance_01]

Good lord...that would sound like a Raptor for sure.....

Oddly enough, the temps on this drive are almost 8C lower than my previous raptors(150gb), but the drive is a little louder. But still, the performance is unreal for one single drive. I have felt a much greater improvement from going from my 150 raptor to this than I ever got from a raid setup. Nice results, but I still think for the price its not worth it. I have 2 640's in raid 0 and a slice of 275GB and have access times of just 8.8 ms, and then a nice 460GB Raid 1 slice. Granted its a good start, but not enough space and price is just too high.

[Stilletto]

Space is reserved for a storage drive. 300GB is plenty for a primary. Raptor owners have always paid more for performance, that just comes with the territory. Aside from that, the lesser chance for failure with this kind of performance is a winning combination anyday:beer:

[Vengance_01]

Space is reserved for a storage drive. 300GB is plenty for a primary. Raptor owners have always paid more for performance, that just comes with the territory. Aside from that, the lesser chance for failure with this kind of performance is a winning combination anyday:beer: True that, but raid is more fun to play with.

[crosshairs]

True that, but raid is more fun to play with.

Right up until it goes bad..:)

I really want one..... my RAID-0 74 Gb Raptors pull about the same numbers with the seek times a little higher....

I would love to have that with a single drive...
why did I click on this post....gotta run out and get my credit card now..:)

[nightelph]

Would one velociraptor be faster than two normal raptors in a raid array? At $300, isn't that close to 15,000rpm scsi drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822116012) pricing?

[prime81]

Close to SCSI yes, but for the performance... your dam close to SCSI or faster for that matter.

[freeagent]

Would one velociraptor be faster than two normal raptors in a raid array? At $300, isn't that close to 15,000rpm scsi drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822116012) pricing?

the str is about the same if you compared a vrapter to 2x150s. tho the raid is a little better there. random access is a touch better in the raid setup, as well as the average read is about 60 mb/s faster with raid0. i still want one tho :)

[thideras]

random access is a touch better in the raid setup,Maybe my Raptor 150 is a bad one, but I get 9 ms seek times. Putting them in RAID would make that worse.

[nightelph]

Heh, thinking of picking up a second raptor 150 and setting up RAID.

Thid: My random access time is 8ms, according to sandra, don't feel bad. ~63 mb/s.

[nd4spdbh2]

the fellas over at SPCR found some intresting things about this drive.... if you want it to run super quiet DONT use the heatsink thing that comes with it. just soft mount it / suspend it in a 3.5inch bay.

Its a friggin bitchin drive i must say but its way out of my price / gb range... 1:1 was reserved for 2000 tech lol now we got 1tb drives for 169 bucks lol.

[freeagent]

Maybe my Raptor 150 is a bad one, but I get 9 ms seek times. Putting them in RAID would make that worse.


i think it depends on the size of your slice, and what os your useing. at a 60 gig slice for windows, i was getting 7 or 8ms, i cant recall off hand right now, im at work so i cant see my screens, but i cut it down to 40 gb, and it went down to 5.7ms in vista, but in xp64, i get 6.4ms, weird.. ill have a look at my screens when i get home, but i can say my drives were never at 9ms, that seems like a lot for sure..

[Stilletto]

the str is about the same if you compared a vrapter to 2x150s. tho the raid is a little better there. random access is a touch better in the raid setup, as well as the average read is about 60 mb/s faster with raid0. i still want one tho :)

Access time will actually suffer ...it will actually scale with raid. Two drives have to access data instead of one, and this will, in larger raid setups, create a longer seek/access times.

[mgoode]

Here's my velociraptors in matrix raid 0(100gb slice.) running Vista64

[sirRealist]

Here's my velociraptors in matrix raid 0(100gb slice.) running Vista64

Looks awesome, but could you repost using the "long run"... more reliable/useful info.

I just finished setting but my matrix raid, but I'm using 2x Seagate 7200.11 drives. For comparison purposes, heres the SS of my 100GB RAID0 slice:

http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/7884/hdtach3gi5.jpg

http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/9420/hdtune3fb0.jpg

[mgoode]

Here's my long run.

[silencer51]

Mgoode did you disable write back cache before running the long benchmark?

'Cause I see both burst and read speeds are lower (burst with write back cache on should be off the scale)...

[Codeman05]

Someone on HF actually had a rather good comparison of the VelociRaptor vs the old Raptors in multiple configurations:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1313337

[mgoode]

Mgoode did you disable write back cache before running the long benchmark?

'Cause I see both burst and read speeds are lower (burst with write back cache on should be off the scale)...

whoops... enabled;)

[freeagent]

yum :)

[silencer51]

whoops... enabled;)

:clap::clap::clap:

thats more like it!

*drools*

[MadMan007]

That access time is totally :drool:

[Stilletto]

That access time is totally :drool:

Yes it is, but likely only for benchmarks....I would bet only marginal real world gains:beer:

[tuskenraider]

Yes it is, but likely only for benchmarks....I would bet only marginal real world gains:beer:Quicker access always helps as every movement a hard drive makes is affected by it. If you want to argue the amount, well everything is marginal in the whole realm of comparing each generation of hard drives with each other. That access time if rather phenominal for the amount of space it covers if I say so myself.

[mgoode]

Here is my other slice, 493 gb for games:)

[nightelph]

Someone on HF actually had a rather good comparison of the VelociRaptor vs the old Raptors in multiple configurations:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1313337

Thanks for the link. If I can get a deal on another raptor150, I might pick one up.

[sirRealist]

Not trying to jack the thread here, but how does my performance compare to raptors and "performance" HD setups in general (see my post #26, page 1)?

I mean, it looks like my bench numbers are close to mgoode's, and he's got two VelociRaptor's in RAID0. I know what the individual numbers mean, but I don't know how they come together to give a general idea of how good things are.

I also have some posts at the end of the Matrix Raid sticky (the first one, not the newer one about how to set one up) with more deets and discussion. again, not trying to jack the thread, please ignore if these questions are out-of-line.

Thanks!

[Stilletto]

This thread is starting to turn into another raid is better or raid is a waste...:(

The REAL bottom line here is that if you have money to blow for almost non-existant real world performance, then go for it. It is not worth the money. You will get better performance by either upgrading your GPU, CPU. or another component. If you are looking for perhaps an extra .5sec loading a level in a game (30sec vs 29.5sec) and are loaded with $$ to spare, then by all means, raid them suckers:beer:

[nightelph]

Ouch dude, guns -a- blazin'. I thought it was settled that for certain things (anything that has to be loaded or a large transfer), a pair of raptors in raid 0 had benefits.
/exiting thread stage left.

[Stilletto]

Ouch dude, guns -a- blazin'. I thought it was settled that for certain things (anything that has to be loaded or a large transfer), a pair of raptors in raid 0 had benefits.
/exiting thread stage left.

I just hate to see people spend big money in the wrong areas, when they could really get a substantial improvement with money spent elsewhere.
I have done the benchmarks, bought the raptors, seen the difference...wasn't worth it.
Just trying to look out for my fellow OC'ers:beer:

[nightelph]

:)

[tuskenraider]

I just hate to see people spend big money in the wrong areas, when they could really get a substantial improvement with money spent elsewhere.
I have done the benchmarks, bought the raptors, seen the difference...wasn't worth it.
Just trying to look out for my fellow OC'ers:beer:And to others it is and so round and round it goes.