- Joined
- Oct 8, 2004
- Location
- San Antonio, Texas
Anything I could/should do to fix that? Forgot to mention I used the 128k stripe.
I'm not gonna trip about it, though. It's faster than my single drive and cost me $0.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Who says that two raptors arent better than one? Part 2
- Thread starter dominick32
- Start date
I'm not gonna trip about it, though. It's faster than my single drive and cost me $0.
OP
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Location
- New York
- Thread Starter
- #102
what the.... 13.2ms access time for a single perp????? wow...
so for REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE, which is the most important? i'm basically just referring to:
-Windows Boot Time and Games Boot Times
-Program Installation Times (I guess file copying goes here too)
-Ripping/Burning DVDs
Those are what I do... and I'm trying to weight out WHICH IS BEST for my liking, ya know? I have tried these setups:
Single 74gb 8mb Raptor
Raid0 2x74gb 8mb Raptors
Single 320GB 7200.10
Raid0 3x320GB 7200.10 intel matrix 30gb slice
Single 320GB Hitachi T7K500
I just could never tell differences between any of these setups... and I think the Hitachi felt like it booted the quickest, which leads me to believe I probably have some sort of user error with regards to software setup of some sort...
Real World Performance is going to be hands down your access time. The three things that you listed here for the most part:
are going to be affected by access time. The Raptor is going to be your best bet in this category.
Honestly, dont take my signature as being biased
but I would pick up a 74Gig 16mb Raptor and use it for the boot/swap/game/app drive and pick up a cheap 300 gig SATA HD in the classifieds for data. Forget about raid for the time being because there is a lot of new technology coming within the next 6 months. I'm talking in the realm of solid state technology. SSD Sata Drives, Hybrid NAND + SATA Drives, DMA Access PCIe NAND, and we are talking tech that is going to blow away all current HD technology by leaps and bounds. I wouldnt have told you to save your money 1 year ago to wait for SSD, but I honestly believe in the storage market that now is the time to put your expenses on hold for at least 6 months to a year.Sorry for the run-on paragraph, sometimes I get a little excited.
OP
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Location
- New York
- Thread Starter
- #104
Anything I could/should do to fix that? Forgot to mention I used the 128k stripe.
I'm not gonna trip about it, though. It's faster than my single drive and cost me $0.
Honestly, I wouldnt worry about it until you plan on purchasing your next drive setup. Your access time is in line, your array seems to be working fine correct? But your throughput is a tad on the low side. For example: Using identical drives (2X74g 8mb Raptors)I produced 128 MB/s sustained read compared to your 99 MB/s. I cant dive deep enough into my brain tonight but I also remember vaguely that there were two versions of the 8mb Raptor as well. An original 8mb and a revision. The original firmware was buggy and physically the drive produced slower reads/writes than its revised model. Dont quote me on specifics, its getting late.
My opinion for you: Leave it alone until you decide on something newer/faster. You have a nice drive setup.
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2004
- Location
- San Antonio, Texas
Those are pretty much my thoughts exactly on what to do.Honestly, I wouldnt worry about it until you plan on purchasing your next drive setup. Your access time is in line, your array seems to be working fine correct? But your throughput is a tad on the low side. For example: Using identical drives (2X74g 8mb Raptors)I produced 128 MB/s sustained read compared to your 99 MB/s. I cant dive deep enough into my brain tonight but I also remember vaguely that there were two versions of the 8mb Raptor as well. An original 8mb and a revision. The original firmware was buggy and physically the drive produced slower reads/writes than its revised model. Dont quote me on specifics, its getting late.
My opinion for you: Leave it alone until you decide on something newer/faster. You have a nice drive setup.
One of the drives in an original. My dad bought it right around when they came out. The other drive was purchased months later and was supposed to go into my grandads computer. It did, and he thought it "died" so he gave it to me. Now I have both.
I probably wouldn't notice the ~30mb/s anyway.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
Honestly, I wouldnt worry about it until you plan on purchasing your next drive setup. Your access time is in line, your array seems to be working fine correct? But your throughput is a tad on the low side. For example: Using identical drives (2X74g 8mb Raptors)I produced 128 MB/s sustained read compared to your 99 MB/s. I cant dive deep enough into my brain tonight but I also remember vaguely that there were two versions of the 8mb Raptor as well. An original 8mb and a revision. The original firmware was buggy and physically the drive produced slower reads/writes than its revised model. Dont quote me on specifics, its getting late.
My opinion for you: Leave it alone until you decide on something newer/faster. You have a nice drive setup.
i dealt with this for almost 2 yrs until i found out i had two different models of the 74gb raptors. my 1st 74gb 8mb raptor cost me $240, and that was when they were HOT when they first came out. my 2nd one cost me about $140 after rebates, a hot deal I couldn't resist.... i bought the second one maybe 8-12 months after the first.
The original was FLA00 and the newer one was FLC00... something like that... basically, the 2nd one I bought was the revision, and the first one was one of the first 8mb models.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2007
Help. I'm not seeing any of the pictures...
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2002
- Location
- Seattle
Click the link at the beginning of the first post.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2004
- Location
- Houston Tx
So what happened to the plans of the dual 150 gig raptors in RAID 0?
I agree the Hitachi does boot the Quickest I've seen it on allot of pc's it's not you.what the.... 13.2ms access time for a single perp????? wow...
so for REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE, which is the most important? i'm basically just referring to:
-Windows Boot Time and Games Boot Times
-Program Installation Times (I guess file copying goes here too)
-Ripping/Burning DVDs
Those are what I do... and I'm trying to weight out WHICH IS BEST for my liking, ya know? I have tried these setups:
Single 74gb 8mb Raptor
Raid0 2x74gb 8mb Raptors
Single 320GB 7200.10
Raid0 3x320GB 7200.10 intel matrix 30gb slice
Single 320GB Hitachi T7K500
I just could never tell differences between any of these setups... and I think the Hitachi felt like it booted the quickest, which leads me to believe I probably have some sort of user error with regards to software setup of some sort...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2004
- Location
- New York City
kind of confused here.......
so by putting them in raid 0 there mirroring each other? so they work as one?
so by putting them in raid 0 there mirroring each other? so they work as one?
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
No not a mirror. It basically puts one half of info on one drive, and the other half on the other drive.
When you go to access that info, it pulls it from TWO DRIVES at the same time instead of one drive.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
Raptors are the best
good review.
good review.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2008
- Location
- Melbourne Australia
LOL nice comment Jackson, i see your knowledge of raptors!
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
Now that banned boy above bumped this post I've got to mention something.
My 36GB Raptor 8mb cache in my AM2 3ghz OC brisbane rig (my secondary) seems to boot faster than my primary rig, which consists of a Wolfdale core2 4ghz and 2x74GB 16mb raptors in Raid0.
What's up with that? I'm thinking it's probably b/c the raid bios utility boot-up wastes a lot of time, but I feel like the desktop as at least as quick on the 36GB raptor...
I mean, HDTach says something else, but boot-up time is also important to me.
My 36GB Raptor 8mb cache in my AM2 3ghz OC brisbane rig (my secondary) seems to boot faster than my primary rig, which consists of a Wolfdale core2 4ghz and 2x74GB 16mb raptors in Raid0.
What's up with that? I'm thinking it's probably b/c the raid bios utility boot-up wastes a lot of time, but I feel like the desktop as at least as quick on the 36GB raptor...
I mean, HDTach says something else, but boot-up time is also important to me.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2006
Ghost will do it... And that other program who's name I keep forgetting...
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Location
- Near Toronto Canada
Mmmmmkay. Yeeeeahhh. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks slow format = better performance.
grrrreeeeeeat.
