Raptors and Velociraptors

[Zak33]

/Cough

My sig (the bit about partitions)

[aidanjt]

I know, I participated in the discussion, but SAS wont help here, unless you're looking into funky iSCSI stuff which is silly expensive. There is a software solution to your problem, but not for Windows. Besides, are you *really* going to use more than 36 partitions? You can also use folder mounting rather than silly DOS partition labels, which doesn't have the same limitation, to be honest I never even tried to push the limits of NT folder partition mounting, but I doubt it'll be anything that any person would ever need.

[Zak33]

wasn't aimed at you chap...was for the Thread starter

[aidanjt]

Ahhhhhhhhh, that's what happens when I run around like a blue-arse fly, and I make quick hexus 'checkins'.

Hope what I said is useful to the OP anyway.

[this_is_gav]

EDIT:

From some benchmarks I've seen, these are a good replacement for a 150Gb Raptor.

Obviously not as fast as a Raptor but almost as fast and a whole lot cheaper than a Raptor

Computer hardware and software at amazing prices, available online from Scan Computers UK

Comparison of this drive to a Raptor:
Seagate's Barracuda 7200.10 hard drive - The Tech Report - Page 5

The 7200.10s are cheaper for a reason. They're bloody awful. There's a 50/50 chance you'll get one of the cheap ones made in the Chinese factory that are both noisier and much less reliable than the Taiwanese built ones (which most seem not to have had issues with, though I did have a 400GB one fail within 4 months here - still 2 month more than the Chinese 320GB I had though). No idea if the 7200.11 range is an improvement (in that the factories now build them identically), but I wouldn't touch the 7200.10 range with the proverbial barge-pole.

[FifthFreedom]

What would you suggest as a Raptor replacement?

[this_is_gav]

Just get a Samsung F1 (the 640GB and 1TB ones are the fast ones I believe). Unless you're doing a lot of HD intensive work (and even then it's dependant on the work) then chances are you'll notice very little difference.

[TooNice]

Couple of comparisons. Looks like my memory didn't fail me. Only the Samsung T166 and the 5400RPM WD GP are quieter (and the WD Scorpio for laptop) are more quiet than the Velociraptor, at least on idle. And from a performance point of view, it's kind of like the 8800 Ultra of the HD (the Mtron would be the GX2).

[FifthFreedom]

I already have a Samsung F1 1TB...

So you don't reckon I'll notice any slowdown if I boot from that drive?

[rufeo]

I already have a Samsung F1 1TB...

So you don't reckon I'll notice any slowdown if I boot from that drive?

my friend has a samsung f1 750gb, and the boot up time for windows isn't too much slower than my raptor. the 1tb versions of the samsung will be quicker, but i'm not sure how it would fare compared to a raptor tbh but i reckon it'd be mighty close.... i've also got the samsung 1tb, but not using it to boot off because i'm obviously going to make use of the quicker access time on the raptor.

have you got a raptor? if you have the 150gb version then i say stick with that, but if you have the 74 or 36gb versions then it might be idea to boot from the samsung. it'll certainly be a lot quieter....

[ikix]

Cheers for everyone's replies, made me think a bit more. Have decided its not really worth all that extra money for a couple of extra seconds saved each boot or game load. What would people suggest as a good, fast and hopefully quiet replacement.

[shaithis]

Check out Storage Review to see how the latest drives compare.

[ikix]

Check out Storage Review to see how the latest drives compare.

The website seems to be down for me....

[rufeo]

personally i would go for one of the new f1 samsungs, either the 640gb or 1tb drives. the increased platter density on them means that they're very quicker. they're also very quiet imo. have hear that western digital also have a similar 640gb drive available as well, but not too clued up on that one. quite a few number of ppl have complained about reliability issues with the 1tb drive. but tbh with it costing so much less than other 1tb drives out there i'm assuming they're also selling more of them hence why more seem to be failing....

[MadduckUK]

No, and there's no need to, SATA is the mini-SAS controller for cheap production. The customer needs to decide if they really need SAS features, they rarely do however.

I know, I participated in the discussion, but SAS wont help here, unless you're looking into funky iSCSI stuff which is silly expensive. There is a software solution to your problem, but not for Windows. Besides, are you *really* going to use more than 36 partitions? You can also use folder mounting rather than silly DOS partition labels, which doesn't have the same limitation, to be honest I never even tried to push the limits of NT folder partition mounting, but I doubt it'll be anything that any person would ever need.

so an SAS drive will work on an SATA controller?

[rufeo]

apparently not, but SATA can be used on a SAS backplate.....

Serial Attached SCSI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

scroll down to the bottom and look at the table with the pictures