[Live]

Ender17, on Jan 3 2006, 04:51 PM, said:

bjorn44, on Jan 3 2006, 02:27 PM, said:

I just want to thank you for an very good review as always. Storagereview.com is my only source for news on storage news and reviews and I'll never look elsewhere. No need to!

Keep up the good work!

why was the part about the Raptor X and the differences between them removed?

This is the part that really bugs me in an otherwise excellent review that is out before everyone else. Good work!

But back to the problem. There is according to many sources 2 versions of this drive. Not even mentioning this in the review (at least it wasn’t mentioned in the one I read) is discouraging. WD complained about you stealing thunder from there CES announcement?

As a desktop user a “gamer” version seems very enticing if it’s not all bling bling. Single user firmware could potentially be a big improvement. I was hoping to press the order button right about now but I guess I have to wait.

Anyone who read the review while it contained info on this like to share some info?

Whatever the reason for not sharing the info on the different version of the 1500 I think you could at least mentioned the problem and said something about it even if its just we cant comment right now.

[tntomek]

Will there be a single platter version? For those of us using this as a boot drive size was never an issue, I still have my GD360 with plenty of leftover space.

[Eugene]

Live, on Jan 3 2006, 06:39 PM, said:

I think you could at least mentioned the problem and said something about it even if its just we cant comment right now.

Allow us until 10 PM EST tomorrow.

Thanks,

Eugene

[infirm]

Looks like you can get the drive directly from WD online store. At least they say it is now in stock.

WD info page for new Raptor

[Katatonic]

Hopefully this will drive the prices down of the 74 as I only want it for a nice faster OS and a bit of gaming, where it clearly has an advantage

Is there anyway you can review these two hard drives (WD1500) in RAID?

[Eugene]

888, on Jan 4 2006, 12:34 AM, said:

Looks like the 42.8 is a typo (or is it 42.5 ?)

Fixed, thanks.

Quote

I think the 2.5 year history is more close to the real count?

3(.0) is actually the closest, changed.

Quote

Just wondering why there's page no.2 of the review not existing:
http://www.storagere...1500ADFD_2.html

Page 2's content remains under NDA until tomorrow 10 PM EST. The article should have waited for complete publication until then, but since the cat is out of the bag, rather than pulling the entire writeup (one option), we've honored WD's request and modified certain parts of the article regarding another product. The full version will be restored tomorrow evening.

[phoenix]

Impressive performance & good article....

[TechNet]

Great review Eugene.

In the review you mentioned :- "This time around, thankfully, TLER ships disabled by default and may be enabled via a utility for installations that would benefit from the feature."

How much do you know about this utility, where is can be downloaded from, can it be used to disable TLER on the RE2 drive etc. etc.

Any help would be much appreciated as I have some RE2 drives I would like to turn TLER off.

[Murphy17]

Nice review !

So I think comparing hard disk in RAID array would be more representative for server usage. Overthemore it shoud be interesting to compare RAID and none RAID performance depending on hard disk usage (server or single user machine). Today RAID is more and more accessible to none professional constumers and is now integrated on some chipsets.

I'm a in the cathogory of power users, I use a 3ware 8506-12 with 250 Go Samsung spin point Hard drives in RAID 5 array and I would know if my controller will provide good performance with such hight speed SATA drives like the Western Digital Raptor WD1500 or if I should upgrade to 15k SCSI hard drives

I hope other bench in RAID array...


PS : sorry for my poor english (I'm french)