To the average user (a light gamer, a multimedia user), a Raptor holds no significant advantage. While the drive is faster, the user probably will not notice much of a difference.
THERE IS NO NOTICIABLE DIFFERENCE, i have been on both before (seagate barracudas in raid 0 and a Raptor)leetkyle wrote:
To the average user (a light gamer, a multimedia user), a Raptor holds no significant advantage. While the drive is faster, the user probably will not notice much of a difference.
Exactly....seagate sucks....SexyCabbage wrote:
seagate barracudas in raid 0 and a Raptor)
There isn't a noticable difference unless you have your OS on it, in which case it will load faster in raid 0, but the raptor is faster in single than a 7200, however yes, you probably won't notice a big difference, although I noticed a HUGE difference in my 2 raptors in raid 0 in windows load times, game load times, and general computing. That is all I was trying to say.
Well what about 4 x 80Gig 7200rpm drives in RAID 0+1? The OP obviously isn't concerned with having a huge amount of space but wants good load times...
Personally I'd go the Raptor because when I tried to set up my RAID I failed miserably. (One of the drives turned out to be faulty, so it wasn't my fault but it was still a pain).
Personally I'd go the Raptor because when I tried to set up my RAID I failed miserably. (One of the drives turned out to be faulty, so it wasn't my fault but it was still a pain).
Striping and mirroring would no faster than striping alone, in fact you may lose a trivial amount of time depending on the controller. But its well worth it in terms of having a good fail over. But also consider now you are adding a bit more heat to your case.cospengle wrote:
Well what about 4 x 80Gig 7200rpm drives in RAID 0+1? The OP obviously isn't concerned with having a huge amount of space but wants good load times...
Personally I'd go the Raptor because when I tried to set up my RAID I failed miserably. (One of the drives turned out to be faulty, so it wasn't my fault but it was still a pain).
My last build I used 4 of those 320GB seagates (bought 5 to have a spare), but later ghosted it all back to a single drive.
Last edited by jsnipy (2007-08-05 20:34:48)
Yeah, that's what I meant. RAID 0 has twice the chance of failure as a single Raptor drive (well, I guess it depends on how good the drives are).jsnipy wrote:
But its well worth it in terms of having a good fail over.
Yeah, I had though that might be a consideration. I'm thinking about trying my RAID 1 setup again and getting a Raptor now they're getting cheaper, that's why I put the idea forward. I'm not sure if I should get 2 more of the drives I have and go 0+1, or put the two I've got in RAID 1 and get a Raptor. I like fast load times, but I'd like to get some redundancy happening, the reason being we store a lot of stuff on my computer that we don't want to keep on our laptops. Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread...jsnipy wrote:
But also consider now you are adding a bit more heat to your case.
EDIT: meh, maybe I'll just get 4 Raptor drives - problem solved. lol
Last edited by cospengle (2007-08-05 21:19:27)
The chances of drive failure is something like 1/10000. So, with RAID0, that is down to 1/5000. 1/5000 is still pretty unlikely odds
I doubt it's as tiny as 1/10000. I'd say that when your hard drive are passed 3 years old, it goes WAY higher than 1/10000.leetkyle wrote:
The chances of drive failure is something like 1/10000. So, with RAID0, that is down to 1/5000. 1/5000 is still pretty unlikely odds
unless you get maxtor drives then its like 1/5leetkyle wrote:
The chances of drive failure is something like 1/10000. So, with RAID0, that is down to 1/5000. 1/5000 is still pretty unlikely odds
Western Digital all the wayjsnipy wrote:
unless you get maxtor drives then its like 1/5leetkyle wrote:
The chances of drive failure is something like 1/10000. So, with RAID0, that is down to 1/5000. 1/5000 is still pretty unlikely odds
That depends entirely on what you're doing. Going on the internets? Of course not. Playing games, slightly. Installing, transfering files around. Definitely.BeerzGod wrote:
All you pay for with Raptors is the name "Raptor". They're popular drives because they claim 10,000rpm speeds which ARE NOT noticably different from 7,200rpm. While they are a good quality HD, they are also a massive waste of money. Go with 2 HD's from a quality brand like Seagate, or Western Digital and put them in Raid 0. You'll have three times the storage capacity then a single Raptor, you'll have a fast loading computer, and you'll be happy knowing that you didn't fall victim to the bs hype that is the Raptor.
My failure rate for Maxtor is 3/3 All within 1 year.jsnipy wrote:
unless you get maxtor drives then its like 1/5leetkyle wrote:
The chances of drive failure is something like 1/10000. So, with RAID0, that is down to 1/5000. 1/5000 is still pretty unlikely odds
My most noticeable increase in performance came from raid0, not my two Raptors.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pid=857159#p857159 . Raptors are not good bang for the buck to be honest.
Maximum PC even abandoned Raptors this year when they built their dream machine (This months issue). Subscribers got it last week .
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pid=857159#p857159 . Raptors are not good bang for the buck to be honest.
Maximum PC even abandoned Raptors this year when they built their dream machine (This months issue). Subscribers got it last week .
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Seagate don't suck. In fact Seagate and Samsung currently make my two favourite hard drives.jamiet757 wrote:
Exactly....seagate sucks....SexyCabbage wrote:
seagate barracudas in raid 0 and a Raptor)
You've demonstrated you don't know what you're talking about quite clearly over the course of this thread. Please refrain from chatting nonsense.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-08-07 06:55:59)
Yep. I might be doing the same there here as well. Sell my Raptor and go RAID0 for a lot more space! Samsung, Seagate and Western Digital are at the top of my list for drives
You bought 3 of them?!cospengle wrote:
My failure rate for Maxtor is 3/3 All within 1 year.jsnipy wrote:
unless you get maxtor drives then its like 1/5leetkyle wrote:
The chances of drive failure is something like 1/10000. So, with RAID0, that is down to 1/5000. 1/5000 is still pretty unlikely odds
Raptors do make a noticable difference. I did a time test when I got my raptor, and found that starting up BF2 was three seconds faster, starting a karkand single player match was 4 seconds faster, and a local BF2 wake server was 15 seconds faster. Actually joining an online game has been 5-10 seconds faster, which helps a lot (sneak to the back flags before the enemy has spawned ).
The problem is their price - you can get a 750GB drive for the same price as a 150GB raptor - but if you have the money, it is worth it.
The problem is their price - you can get a 750GB drive for the same price as a 150GB raptor - but if you have the money, it is worth it.
I got 2 74gb raptors in raid 0, its fast as hell but its got a big price too, i got 137 gb for 310 euro's. I got all my settings on high and some 64 players maps only take about 15 seconds to load and a couple of seconds to veriefy client data. Other maps take like a couple of seconds longer. I got a 320 gb seagate barracuda for storage.
2 x 320GB in Raid 0 vs WD Raptor. Get the 2 bigger 7200rpm disks in raid 0.
2 x 320GB in Raid 0 vs WD Raptor. Get the 2 bigger 7200rpm disks in raid 0.
lol... Try a 30 sec boot speed increase, as well as insta-game installs. Plus it shaves time off your loading.SexyCabbage wrote:
the 10,000rpm has no noticiable difference than 7,200. i would go with raid 0
you're back?BabySpinach wrote:
lol... Try a 30 sec boot speed increase, as well as insta-game installs. Plus it shaves time off your loading.SexyCabbage wrote:
the 10,000rpm has no noticiable difference than 7,200. i would go with raid 0
@person who bought so many Maxtor drives: you should of learnt you lesson after the second one!
These beast are even said to hold their own against the little buggers.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 … 552,00.asp
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 … 552,00.asp
Xbone Stormsurgezz
lol. No I bought 2 of them, but yeah I got pwned to the Maxtor.ghettoperson wrote:
You bought 3 of them?!cospengle wrote:
My failure rate for Maxtor is 3/3 All within 1 year.jsnipy wrote:
unless you get maxtor drives then its like 1/5
I bought one at first, but then it started to play up on me so I bought another one while I got an exchange on the first one that was still under warranty. So then I had 2 of them and both of those crapped themselves (all 3 were still under warranty) but then I just bought a Seagate which is still going strong.leetkyle wrote:
@person who bought so many Maxtor drives: you should of learnt you lesson after the second one!
Last edited by cospengle (2007-08-07 22:34:14)