74 GB Raptor Question

GEN_Stone · Dec 1, 2004

Well, I just purchased my 74 gb raptor finally (yay!). Anyways... being that it is 10,000 rpm's shouldn't I at least notice decreased load times in games and windows etc? I am really not noticing a difference from my old 7200 rpm western digital... Now that being said... maybe I just can't notice, that doesn't mean it is broken. Are there any tests I can run to really see if it is running correctly?

Vio1 · Dec 1, 2004

download HDtach and tell us what is benches at

GEN_Stone · Dec 1, 2004

Kk not sure what info u need so ill just write stuff down that I think is important

I did the long version of the test and heres what I got.
Burst Speed= 114.7 MB/s
Random Access= 7.9 ms
CPU utilization= 2%
Avg Read= 64.9 MB/s

Vio1 · Dec 1, 2004

looks right. try defragging your computer with diskkeeper.

Also run bootvis to speed up windows load up.

madhatR · Dec 1, 2004

hmm isnt the random access on the 74 gb raptors supposed to be 5.9ms ??

defintely defrag and run bootvis

Vio1 · Dec 1, 2004

yes but you have to add the latency... which is 2ms extra... making it actually 7.9ms

here are my old benchmarks when I had raptors:
74gb raptor:
HD Tach 2.70............7.6ms seek time
max 73.4mb/s
min 38.1mb/s
avg 65.3mb/s

36gb raptor:
HD Tach 2.70............8.5ms seek time
max 60mb/s
min 36.4mb/s
avg 50.1mb/s

GEN_Stone · Dec 1, 2004

thanks for the quick replies fellas

So it all looks normal then? Shouldn't I notice a speed increase similar to how I did when I upgraded from a 5400 rpm hd to a 7200 rpm?

eduncan911 · Dec 1, 2004

Vio1 said:
yes but you have to add the latency... which is 2ms extra... making it actually 7.9ms

here are my old benchmarks when I had raptors:
74gb raptor:
HD Tach 2.70............7.6ms seek time
max 73.4mb/s
min 38.1mb/s
avg 65.3mb/s

36gb raptor:
HD Tach 2.70............8.5ms seek time
max 60mb/s
min 36.4mb/s
avg 50.1mb/s

Humm. That makes me want to get a pair of 74 gigabyters instead of the pair of 36 gigabyter Raptors I have now with the cached controller card I am using for Raid 0.

Let me get that HDTech and see what my benchmarks are....

madhatR · Dec 1, 2004

yeah i dont know if i want 2x74gb raptors or 2x36gb raptors for my system drive .. since i have 2x120s wds for my storage ..

i dont think i need 150 gbs for system lol .. i barely use 25gb

Vio1 · Dec 1, 2004

read this:
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=310250

i dont believe in raptor raid

eduncan911 · Dec 1, 2004

madhatR said:
yeah i dont know if i want 2x74gb raptors or 2x36gb raptors for my system drive .. since i have 2x120s wds for my storage ..

i dont think i need 150 gbs for system lol .. i barely use 25gb

Exactly! That's why I went with 2x36GD WDs (cause I have 2x200GB Maxtor 7200s in RAID 1, hehe). And in the past, I've gotten better performance from smaller SCSI drives when used in a RAID 0 array for databases. So I thought the logic was the same for these drives. Looks like I was wrong.

Just ran HDTach. I'ts better, but I'm a bit disappointed. Wanted higher rates since I used other programs on my Ultra160s in the past and gotten higher numbers (>140MB/s on single drives, using PCI64 buses).

Promise 2+0 Stripe/RAID0 1.10
Random access: 7.8ms
CPU Utilization: 16%
Average read: 92.1MB/s
Burst Rate: 129.2MB/s

There's proof that SATA RAID 0 works I guess. Then again, I am not using on-board raid:

- Promise SX4 S150 SATA Raid PCI Controller card - 4 port
- Samsung 256MB PC166 ECC memory stick (for write cache on the card!)
- 2x36GB Raptor drives in RAID 0
- 2x200GB Maxtor 7.2k 8MB SATA drives in RAID 1
- System is overclocked currently with 230mhz bus (running the Northbridge 15% over normal, no PCI-lock)

I guess I have a decent system.

Makes me wonder what I'd hit with 2x74GBs... humm.

eduncan911 · Dec 1, 2004

Vio1 said:
read this:
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=310250

i dont believe in raptor raid

Maybe you should re-consider.

Or rename your post(s) to "I don't believe in onboard raid", not Raptor raid.

obiwan · Dec 1, 2004

Not sure if it makes any dif but here's mine. 2 74gb rappys in raid0

Burst Speed= 226.6 MB/s
Random Access= 8.0 ms
CPU utilization= 4%
Avg Read= 119.8 MB/s

eduncan911 · Dec 1, 2004

obiwan said:
Not sure if it makes any dif but here's mine. 2 74gb rappys in raid0

Burst Speed= 226.6 MB/s
Random Access= 8.0 ms
CPU utilization= 4%
Avg Read= 119.8 MB/s

Awesome!

Ok, spill it. What mobo/hd controller/bus speed/etc...

That's EXACTLY the speeds I was looking for (hence why I was a bit dis-appointed). I did notice that my graph dropped off severly (it was going higher and higher) at 36GB. Very off graph. Maybe that would account for the CPU usage so high on my setup, and the much lower speed rating.

I wonder if I should move my setup to the onboard hardware raid solution... But I can't see that being ANY faster then the add-on card with cache though...

Humm, I have some serious kinks to work out I see.

obiwan · Dec 1, 2004

eduncan911 said:
Awesome!

Ok, spill it. What mobo/hd controller/bus speed/etc...

That's EXACTLY the speeds I was looking for (hence why I was a bit dis-appointed). I did notice that my graph dropped off severly (it was going higher and higher) at 36GB. Very off graph. Maybe that would account for the CPU usage so high on my setup, and the much lower speed rating.

I wonder if I should move my setup to the onboard hardware raid solution... But I can't see that being ANY faster then the add-on card with cache though...

Humm, I have some serious kinks to work out I see.

Honestly I dont have a clue what the hell i did to finally get this F#@$#!G thing to work. I was at my wits end with stability issues and loong boot times and nothing seemed to work.
Anyhow the mobo is a P5GDC-v with the onboard SATA Raid "Intel 82801FR"
Right now it's at a 115% OC. Thats all i can give ya right now.
Check the database for HDTach and look for mine done tonight at 10:30 under "Valkyrie001"
I ran 2 test 1 short and 1 long and both were close although the short was slightly higher i think.
Also on this last window install i didnt load the Intel Application Accellerator. That seemed to take up to many resources.
Basicly i just kept screwing with it until it worked. :clap:

Obiwan

SybrCLocK · Dec 2, 2004

i went to the store to buy a 74 gig raptor.. and asked for it... when she gave it to me.. i sayd.. gimme a 36 istead.. cuz.. if you think of it.. performance between the 74 and 36 is minimal.. dont tell me you notice a 0.x ms decrease in seek time

and second..i run my system off the raptor.. on a 15GB partition.. and the rest is for games

oh.. and 3rd i noticed how speedy this little ******* is.. from the minute i plugged it in

eduncan911 · Dec 2, 2004

I use two 36GB raptors for a single 72GB partition.

Miguita · Dec 2, 2004

Using two 74GB Raptors in RAID0 seems like the way to go. Better value for money than the 36GBs, too.

eduncan911 · Dec 2, 2004

Miguita said:
Using two 74GB Raptors in RAID0 seems like the way to go. Better value for money than the 36GBs, too.

Yep, these days. When I bought my drives (just like 2 months ago

), the 36GBs were less then 1/2 the price (~$110 vs $240 oem/pricewatch). Now the the 73GBs are ~$177, and 36GBs are ~$108 oem. So yep, better value these days.

-E

Alacritan · Dec 2, 2004

Don't forget the $25 rebate if you get it through NewEgg.

74 GB Raptor Question

Registered

Member

Registered

Member

Member

Member

Registered

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Registered

Member

Registered

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads