36GB Raptor: Very brief review

[attonbitusira]

Hi Everyone,

I decided to write up a very brief review of my experience with swapping out my 80gb os drive for a 36gb raptor one. Enjoy!

Background
It is good practice to store your programs and data on one drive, and your OS on the other. This makes the job of reinstalling Windows a cinch if it should ever fail. I recently purchased a 36gb Raptor from another RFDer. My intent was to replace my 1st generation 80gb sata drive with a lower random access time Raptor. My expectations were faster OS load time, faster interface usage, and faster program access.

Results
The OS load time was not noticeably faster. In fact, there is now a tiny pause right before the green progress bar begins to move; it was not there before. However, program access times are magnificently improved. Opening programs like Sandra, Acronis True Image, Windows Vista Programs and Features, Picasa 3, Firefox, and Thunderbird are all *instantly* opened. There is no delay whatsoever, which I can only attribute to the much improved access time. I do have UAC turned on, and this is where the most improvement was. Previously, UAC would pause, darken the screen, then the familiar "ping" would sound as Vista would ask if I am truly sure I want to continue. The delay was maybe 1-1.5 seconds, nothing major, but certainly there. With the new Raptor, the delay has completely vanished. The seconds I save is not necessarily important, but the feeling of a snappy system is truly a joy.

Benchmarks
I have included some HDtune stats below for some comparison of the drives in my system. Remember that I am using a very old Raptor, and I expect new ones to be even better. Now I just need to get my hands on a VRaptor :)

My hard drives:
36gb wd360gd (sata)
80gb st380211as (sata)
500gb wd5000aaks (sata)
200gb st3200827a (pata)

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/1856/raptork.jpg
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/134/80gbl.jpg
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4194/500gb.jpg
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2277/200gb.jpg

[B0000rt]

Why would anyone be interested in such an old drive? :lol::lol:

[Brandon]

Why would anyone be interested in such an old drive? :lol::lol:

You can get them used for pretty cheap with a balance of warranty remaining. But I guess WD Black drives aren't much more expensive either.

[AudiDude]

As far as a Raptor goes 300>150>75>36. What did you expect? BTW I own all four and the 300 destroys everything pretty bad. Does the OS load a lot faster? A little. Does it help loading programs and large files? A lot.

[board123]

Raptor 36, despite the faster seek time, is slow as molasses compared to any modern hard drive. The transfer speed is crap. That's what happens when your platter density is nearly 10 times lower than something modern, such as a WD6400AAKS.

[attonbitusira]

As far as a Raptor goes 300>150>75>36. What did you expect? BTW I own all four and the 300 destroys everything pretty bad. Does the OS load a lot faster? A little. Does it help loading programs and large files? A lot.

I was hesitant to spend a lot on the new hard drive without seeing what it's younger brothers could do first.

I have no need for large capacity with the Caviar Blacks, and they don't have nearly as quick random access times as the Raptors.

[Amourek]

The old Raptors are all but useless now unless you get them dirt cheap. WD Blacks = faster, bigger, quieter.

[flyz]

The only good 10k rpm drives are the Velociraptors.
640GB Black is pretty awesome for a 7.2k rpm drive. I can't wait to see how fast the WD Blacks based on 500GB platters will be since the 2TB Greens aren't too shabby (except for their price/GB :D)

[attonbitusira]

The caviar blacks beat the 36gb raptor in max read/write. No argument there.

I'd like to see hd tune results from the 150gb raptors. They are pretty reasonable.

[board123]

1500ADFD is still quite a bit slower than 6400AAKS in transfer speed. Access time is obviously higher, but I'd still rather have the 6400AAKS.

[attonbitusira]

To each his own.

Here is some info from Tom's.

Comparing V-Raptor, Raptor, Caviar Black (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/3.5-hard-drive-charts/compare,658.html?prod[2024]=on&prod[2057]=on&prod[1825]=on)

[board123]

Here's RAID 0 with 2x1500ADFD. It's not that great.

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5078/capturepwb.png

[flyz]

A test done on 300 Raptors compared to 640 blacks. Link (http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=658702)
The blacks only drop to a 36Gig raptor speeds after 90% into the 640GB (570ish gigs into the drive.....)

[Bskll]

get some OCZ vertex drive, makes the raptor look slow by comparison.

[attonbitusira]

I spent some time looking at the SSDs but the technology isn't perfected yet. Too many issues with the Jmicron controllers at the entry level, and to be frank the good SSDs are just too expensive.

Even the middle of the road SSDs seem to have performance issues when doing too many IOs.

As much as a 13ms access time is noticeable when moving from a 17ms hard drive, the 8ms is noticeable when moving from a 13ms.

I'm tempted to think that a Raptor 150 will feel a lot more snappy than a Caviar Black. Any takers? :)

[board123]

I doubt it. I've used 1500ADFD drives extensively and they don't feel a whole lot snappier than what I have at home.

[attonbitusira]

I doubt it. I've used 1500ADFD drives extensively and they don't feel a whole lot snappier than what I have at home.

Define extensively.

What sort of difference in speed did you notice vs. the caviar as an OS drive?

[Bskll]

I spent some time looking at the SSDs but the technology isn't perfected yet. Too many issues with the Jmicron controllers at the entry level, and to be frank the good SSDs are just too expensive.

Even the middle of the road SSDs seem to have performance issues when doing too many IOs.

As much as a 13ms access time is noticeable when moving from a 17ms hard drive, the 8ms is noticeable when moving from a 13ms.

I'm tempted to think that a Raptor 150 will feel a lot more snappy than a Caviar Black. Any takers? :)

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531

[gambit_360]

The whole point of Raptor drives are the low access times. This is the reason they are primarily used as system drives. Your Windows experience will feel faster and programs seem to load much faster than before. But for most people, the cost doesn't justify having Excel open 0.5sec vs. 2sec.

I have a 150GB raptor and there is a noticeable difference. The transfer rate is low but it's not really that important to me since I rarely store any huge amounts of data on it. I thought that Raptors were expensive before but after using one, I can't see myself going back to using 7200rpm as a system drive.

[board123]

What sort of difference in speed did you notice vs. the caviar as an OS drive?
Not a whole lot, really. I did a bunch of game testing, so the one thing that most people would comment on is load time. It didn't feel like load times improved much, if at all. Opening folders and apps didn't feel any faster.

The one thing that I did notice was noise. The Raptor is much louder than regular drives when it's seeking.

[B0000rt]

The AAKS are much quieter than the Raptor 150 ADFD though... The Raptor crunches away but AAKS is super quiet. But as board said, I don't notice a difference. My Raptor is out of commission right now so I had to put the AAKS in as an OS drive and I don't really notice much.

[Digital_Domain]

*looks at his original 36GB Raptor*

It sounds like a bike wheel with a playing card running along the spokes, but damn was it fast back in the day. Plus a RAID 1 to store games... I loved my computer back in the day.

Next on my wish list, Intel SSD or an ioFusion board.

[attonbitusira]

I thought that Raptors were expensive before but after using one, I can't see myself going back to using 7200rpm as a system drive.

Agreed. Hopefully I'll have the 150 next week, unless I can find a used v-raptor. They dominate caviar black.

[board123]

Prepare to be disappointed.

[attonbitusira]

Prepare to be disappointed.

And what precisely, would disappoint me?

[Brandon]

And what precisely, would disappoint me?

Not much of a noticeable difference. I went from a 36GB Raptor to a 74GB Raptor, then did the 74GB's in RAID0, and now I'm using a WD 640GB Black. They were all as OS drive. I didn't "feel" a noticeable difference between the different configurations.

You do notice a difference between a WD640GB Black and an Intel X25 SSD though.

[B0000rt]

Not much of a noticeable difference. I went from a 36GB Raptor to a 74GB Raptor, then did the 74GB's in RAID0, and now I'm using a WD 640GB Black. They were all as OS drive. I didn't "feel" a noticeable difference between the different configurations.

You do notice a difference between a WD640GB Black and an Intel X25 SSD though.
Quit tempting me for a X25!!! I might just drop some coin on a 120GB Vertex, those are fairly affordable at $345USD hmmmm!

[board123]

And what precisely, would disappoint me?
At first you'll really like the performance, and after a while you'll realize it's just a placebo effect.