Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 30

Thread: Raptor confusion

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    138
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • Cosworth's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS5
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Quad-Core Q6600 (B3) - Liquid Cooled
      • Memory:
      • 2x 2GB Corsair Dominator PC8500
      • Storage:
      • 150GB Raptor Enterprise + 1TB Samsung F1 + 160GB Samsung
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 2x 512MB Sapphire ATI Radeon X1950PRO
      • PSU:
      • Tagan 1300W Modular
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake ArmourLCS - Full Tower
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 32bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 1x 22" Samung SM2232BW + 2x 19" Samsung SM932B
      • Internet:
      • Sky Broadband @ 8Mb..ish

    Raptor confusion

    Ok, I know the Raptor's have fast access speeds being 10,000RPM but does the fact that they are only SATA I (ATA-150) not make them overall slower or equal to standard HDD when it comes down to file transfer because of this decreased rate against SATA II ?

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,513
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    236 times in 200 posts

    Re: Raptor confusion

    The Raptor's transfer speed is not bottlenecked by the interface. No single hard drive (exclude RAID, i-RAM etc.) is really bottlenecked by SATA I (7200RPM drives have only fairly recently started to breach the 100MB/sec barrier on the outer edge). In terms of sequential transfer (which includes copying files between two drives, but mostly irrelevant for game loading), the Raptor loses against some of the latest, largest 7200RPM drives because they pack a denser platter and the outer edge of larger drives is provides the best sequential transfer performance (that's also why a 500GB drive of the same family as a 250GB drive will be faster overall).

  3. #3
    Honored
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    491
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    15 times in 15 posts
    • ackrite26's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5E-VM HDMi G35
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Duo E6550 w/ Zalman CNPS8700NT
      • Memory:
      • 4Gb Crucial Ballistix DDR2 PC5300 w/ Enzotech Pure Copper Heatspreaders
      • Storage:
      • 1* 36Gb WD raptor/1* 500Gb Samsung Spinpoint HD501LJ
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire HD 4850 512mb
      • PSU:
      • 425W Enermax MOD82+
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Sugo SGO2W
      • Operating System:
      • XP Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG 22" Flatron
      • Internet:
      • Cable - 4Gb

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Raptors should still be quickest.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    138
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • Cosworth's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS5
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Quad-Core Q6600 (B3) - Liquid Cooled
      • Memory:
      • 2x 2GB Corsair Dominator PC8500
      • Storage:
      • 150GB Raptor Enterprise + 1TB Samsung F1 + 160GB Samsung
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 2x 512MB Sapphire ATI Radeon X1950PRO
      • PSU:
      • Tagan 1300W Modular
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake ArmourLCS - Full Tower
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 32bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 1x 22" Samung SM2232BW + 2x 19" Samsung SM932B
      • Internet:
      • Sky Broadband @ 8Mb..ish

    Re: Raptor confusion

    So basically what your saying is that SATA is pointless as HDD's have barely touched the speed transfer rate even set by IDE. Therefore the Rapitor's only real asset is the initial access time.

    Seems hardly worth the extra money for a few milliseconds.

  5. #5
    Honored
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    491
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    15 times in 15 posts
    • ackrite26's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5E-VM HDMi G35
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Duo E6550 w/ Zalman CNPS8700NT
      • Memory:
      • 4Gb Crucial Ballistix DDR2 PC5300 w/ Enzotech Pure Copper Heatspreaders
      • Storage:
      • 1* 36Gb WD raptor/1* 500Gb Samsung Spinpoint HD501LJ
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire HD 4850 512mb
      • PSU:
      • 425W Enermax MOD82+
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Sugo SGO2W
      • Operating System:
      • XP Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG 22" Flatron
      • Internet:
      • Cable - 4Gb

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Thats how computers work mate...and cars... and just about anything. Those who have the money are willing to pay stupid prices for a few % difference (says me with a 36gb raptor as OS boot drive)

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    138
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • Cosworth's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS5
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Quad-Core Q6600 (B3) - Liquid Cooled
      • Memory:
      • 2x 2GB Corsair Dominator PC8500
      • Storage:
      • 150GB Raptor Enterprise + 1TB Samsung F1 + 160GB Samsung
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 2x 512MB Sapphire ATI Radeon X1950PRO
      • PSU:
      • Tagan 1300W Modular
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake ArmourLCS - Full Tower
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 32bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 1x 22" Samung SM2232BW + 2x 19" Samsung SM932B
      • Internet:
      • Sky Broadband @ 8Mb..ish

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by ackrite26 View Post
    Thats how computers work mate...and cars... and just about anything. Those who have the money are willing to pay stupid prices for a few % difference (says me with a 36gb raptor as OS boot drive)
    You forgot to mention the 150GB Raptor as well

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • SmJe's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte 965P-DS3
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2400 MHz
      • Memory:
      • 4096 MB (4 x 1024 DDR2-SDRAM )
      • Storage:
      • Maxtor (251 GB)X2, SAMSUNG (160 GB)X3, WD (500 GB), WDC (200 GB)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT
      • PSU:
      • Tagan 800W
      • Case:
      • Icute Turbine Case (Silver)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung SyncMaster - 19 inches X2
      • Internet:
      • Broadband 3Mbps

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by ackrite26 View Post
    Thats how computers work mate...and cars... and just about anything. Those who have the money are willing to pay stupid prices for a few % difference (says me with a 36gb raptor as OS boot drive)
    So basically what your saying is that IDE which comes in transfer rates of

    ATA-5 (ATA-33) 33.3 Mb/ps
    ATA-5 44.4 Mb/ps
    ATA-5 (ATA-66) 66.6 Mb/ps
    ATA-6 (ATA-100) 100.0Mb/ps
    ATA-7 (ATA-133) 133.0Mb/ps

    and sata drives which come in transfer rates of
    Serial ATA (SATA) 150.0Mb/ps
    Serial ATA II (SATA II) 300.0Mb/ps
    are the wise choice?

    I would sooner pay the extra and get the faster drive.

    Manufacturers produced IDE ranging from 33 to 133. The development then changed to SATA 1 at 150 and SATA 2 at 300. If these speeds were not really achievable from hard drives why develop them?

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,513
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    236 times in 200 posts

    Re: Raptor confusion

    From a single drive perspective, the last instalment of IDE *is* adequate for pretty much every drive out there, save the Cheetah 15K.5. The Samsung F1 1TB is also coming close-ish on the outer edge, but still shy by about 20MB/sec.

    Why SATA then? I can think of a few reasons:
    1. No more messing with Master/Slave. And that also lead to
    2. If you connect two devices on IDE on the same cable, the devices will operate at the 'slowest standard'.
    3. Not only that, but the bandwidth is shared and only perform one operation at a time (until TCQ). So if you are trying to copy a file from one HD to another off the same cable, the drives will definitely be bottlenecked by the interface.
    4. SATA support NCQ (not always beneficial, but can be, and is optional).
    5. Not a performance issue, but SATA cables are easier to work with and devices are hot-swappable.

    So basically from a single drive basis, the same drive with different interface (IDE/SATA) would most likely perform the same. In fact, for years after SATA was released, manufacturers actually used IDE to SATA bridges built onto their SATA drive (basically, the SATA drives were natively IDE). Drives that are natively designed around the SATA interface are comparatively new. SATA 300, quite frankly, doesn't bring much. Yes drives will show a faster burst speed. But when was the last time burst speed brought real world performance benefits? The mechanics that deals with the read/write within the HD (the real bottleneck) won't suddenly work twice as fast because of a change in interface.

  9. #9
    Jay
    Jay is offline
    Gentlemen.. we're history Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Jita
    Posts
    8,364
    Thanks
    304
    Thanked
    568 times in 409 posts
    • Jay's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P5Q Deluxe
      • CPU:
      • Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.0GHz with Corsair H50
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Corsair XMS Pro DDR2 800MHz 5-5-5-12
      • Storage:
      • 128GB Crucial RealSSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire VaporX HD4890 1GB
      • PSU:
      • 720W Enermax Infinity
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define R3 Black Pearl
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x Samsung 22" 226BW V2 (3360 x 1050)
      • Internet:
      • O2 / Cisco ASA 5505

    Re: Raptor confusion

    I think 500gb Samsungs are as fast a Raptors for general use due to the amount of data that can be stored per inch of drive.
    □ΞVΞ□

  10. #10
    Honored
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    491
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    15 times in 15 posts
    • ackrite26's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P5E-VM HDMi G35
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Duo E6550 w/ Zalman CNPS8700NT
      • Memory:
      • 4Gb Crucial Ballistix DDR2 PC5300 w/ Enzotech Pure Copper Heatspreaders
      • Storage:
      • 1* 36Gb WD raptor/1* 500Gb Samsung Spinpoint HD501LJ
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire HD 4850 512mb
      • PSU:
      • 425W Enermax MOD82+
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Sugo SGO2W
      • Operating System:
      • XP Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG 22" Flatron
      • Internet:
      • Cable - 4Gb

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by Cosworth View Post
    You forgot to mention the 150GB Raptor as well
    Lolz i have just sold that one kinda based on my comment, ill let someone else spend over the odds for a bit of a performance increase, need to update 'My System' as it has changed alot!

  11. #11
    Senior Member this_is_gav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Alnwick, Northumberland
    Posts
    4,837
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked
    247 times in 214 posts
    • this_is_gav's system
      • Motherboard:
      • DFI DK X58-T3eH6
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7 920
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Corsair 1333MHz C9
      • Storage:
      • 2xRaptor 150GB (RAID0 300GB), 2.5TB permanent storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia GTX 560 Ti 1GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic X-series
      • Case:
      • Lian-Li A70B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2408WFP
      • Internet:
      • 8M ADSL24

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by Cosworth View Post
    Seems hardly worth the extra money for a few milliseconds.
    It's half the milliseconds.

    They're not much (if any) faster for transfers, but for an OS you certainly notice moving from a recent Raptor set up to a recent 'standard' drive set up. The old Raptors have obviously been left behind, but the recent 150gbs are quite impressive. Not impressive enough to warrant one for standard use if you're paying though. They really start to pay you back when you string together more than in a RAID0 array for something like video editing though.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    138
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • Cosworth's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS5
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Quad-Core Q6600 (B3) - Liquid Cooled
      • Memory:
      • 2x 2GB Corsair Dominator PC8500
      • Storage:
      • 150GB Raptor Enterprise + 1TB Samsung F1 + 160GB Samsung
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 2x 512MB Sapphire ATI Radeon X1950PRO
      • PSU:
      • Tagan 1300W Modular
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake ArmourLCS - Full Tower
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 32bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 1x 22" Samung SM2232BW + 2x 19" Samsung SM932B
      • Internet:
      • Sky Broadband @ 8Mb..ish

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by ackrite26 View Post
    Lolz i have just sold that one kinda based on my comment, ill let someone else spend over the odds for a bit of a performance increase, need to update 'My System' as it has changed alot!


    Quote Originally Posted by this_is_gav View Post
    It's half the milliseconds.

    They're not much (if any) faster for transfers, but for an OS you certainly notice moving from a recent Raptor set up to a recent 'standard' drive set up. The old Raptors have obviously been left behind, but the recent 150gbs are quite impressive. Not impressive enough to warrant one for standard use if you're paying though. They really start to pay you back when you string together more than in a RAID0 array for something like video editing though.
    I was simply toiling with the idea of changing the 160GB Samsung which houses my OS for a 150Gb Enterprise Raptor. So despite being quicker for the OS they are not really that more exceptional to warrant the large outlay unless you have a raid set up. Crickey.. Raid 0 that would mean buying 2...that ain't gonna happen

  13. #13
    Senior Member this_is_gav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Alnwick, Northumberland
    Posts
    4,837
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked
    247 times in 214 posts
    • this_is_gav's system
      • Motherboard:
      • DFI DK X58-T3eH6
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7 920
      • Memory:
      • 12GB Corsair 1333MHz C9
      • Storage:
      • 2xRaptor 150GB (RAID0 300GB), 2.5TB permanent storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia GTX 560 Ti 1GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic X-series
      • Case:
      • Lian-Li A70B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2408WFP
      • Internet:
      • 8M ADSL24

    Re: Raptor confusion

    I never suggested RAIDing 2. I pointed out a very big strength of them.

    They make some sense if you're buying a hard drive for the OS, though not an awful lot. They make very little sense if you've already got a drive for the OS.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    171
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    • DeSean's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P5K Premium Wifi/AP
      • CPU:
      • Intel Q6600 B3 @ 2400Mhz
      • Memory:
      • Corsair Dominator PC2-8500 2x2048MB
      • Storage:
      • Raptor 36GB, MaXLine III 2x250GB, HD501J 2x500GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • BFG 8800GTS OC 320MB
      • PSU:
      • Silverstone Zeus ST75ZF
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ-09
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 225MW
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 10Mb

    Re: Raptor confusion

    Quote Originally Posted by TooNice View Post
    From a single drive perspective, the last instalment of IDE *is* adequate for pretty much every drive out there, save the Cheetah 15K.5. The Samsung F1 1TB is also coming close-ish on the outer edge, but still shy by about 20MB/sec.

    Why SATA then? I can think of a few reasons:
    1. No more messing with Master/Slave. And that also lead to
    2. If you connect two devices on IDE on the same cable, the devices will operate at the 'slowest standard'.
    3. Not only that, but the bandwidth is shared and only perform one operation at a time (until TCQ). So if you are trying to copy a file from one HD to another off the same cable, the drives will definitely be bottlenecked by the interface.
    4. SATA support NCQ (not always beneficial, but can be, and is optional).
    5. Not a performance issue, but SATA cables are easier to work with and devices are hot-swappable.

    So basically from a single drive basis, the same drive with different interface (IDE/SATA) would most likely perform the same. In fact, for years after SATA was released, manufacturers actually used IDE to SATA bridges built onto their SATA drive (basically, the SATA drives were natively IDE). Drives that are natively designed around the SATA interface are comparatively new. SATA 300, quite frankly, doesn't bring much. Yes drives will show a faster burst speed. But when was the last time burst speed brought real world performance benefits? The mechanics that deals with the read/write within the HD (the real bottleneck) won't suddenly work twice as fast because of a change in interface.
    As I understand it, SATA2 includes many of the things you mention above as being benefits of SATA. For example, I think things like Hot Swapping are meant to be properly supported under SATA2 rather than hit and miss in SATA1.

    I read a few years ago about Western Digital using the same IDE to SATA bridge chip on its early Raptors as some controller cards used to convert the signal back into IDE for their controller chips to process.

    I can't stand messing around with IDE cables and jumpers when I have to help other people with their systems...

  15. #15
    Lover & Fighter Blitzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Between Your Mum & Sister
    Posts
    6,310
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked
    382 times in 300 posts
    • Blitzen's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ABIT iX38 QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz : 30 Degrees Idle - 41-46 Degrees Load
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400 @ 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints - RAID 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 285
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU 82+ 625W
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic Q22wb 22" Widescreen - 5ms
      • Internet:
      • O2 premium @ 17mb

    Re: Raptor confusion

    I have just bought myself 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints (seriuosly cheap on Scan) and by the benchmarks i have been seeing, with the 16mb cache, they are bloody quick.

    I will probably RAID 0 them aswell .

    A waste i know, but i want to see them fly.

  16. #16
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,192
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: Raptor confusion

    When flash storage becomes more widespread we might start seeing the interface being used more to its capabilities.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •