[JPW]

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

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.

QUESTION 1: Can anyone comment on this, specifically whether there really is any difference in the firmware between the current "Enterprise" and future "X" versions of the 150? The reason I'm asking is because of Eugene saying "the two different versions do not feature significantly differing firmware . . . Here at least, differences really do extend only skin deep," and then that they differ only in Mean Time Between Failure (lower with the polycarbonate window) and price . . . all before he prefaces the tests with "As previously mentioned, the two 'versions' of the WD1500 only differ cosmetically."


Next,

Here's another reason I wonder if they are identical, sparked by a questionable comment on the available drive's NewEgg page <http://www.newegg.co...N82E16822136012> :

Other Thoughts: I just wanted to make sure everyone knew the ADFD is the enterprise version of the new Raptor. It has raid-specific features that will probably slow down the performance of the drive if not used in a raid configuration. If you want to use this in a desktop please wait for the AHFD which has a fancy clear window on it.

Reviewed By: msudude, 1/5/2006 5:50:53 PM

QUESTION 2: Is "msudude" correct about these "raid-specific features" existing or do you think he's confusing the Raptor 150 with some sort of SCSI / multiuser drive? If anyone can reassure me that the "Enterprise" 150 with the default firmware is indeed perfectly suitable for straight-out-of-the-box single user, non-RAID use as well (just as Eugene's charts nicely suggest), it would be very helpful.

Thanks!

[B.Slisk]

probedb, on Jan 7 2006, 08:38 AM, said:

Exactly, not exactly your typical enthusiast that needs that kind of power/space/speed. Anyways how the hell do you fit a 3.5" drive in the space of a 2.5" drive or am I being stupid in assuming there are extra big laptops which shouldn't be called laptops?

At first I didn't really get your point, but then that's just another sign of old age I guess. Looking back this is what I associate with the word "Laptop": Toshiba T3100/20
Or perhaps this: Ericsson Portable PC

I've worked with both (though I try to forget as much as possible about the Ericsson POS), and at that time there were no 2½" HDD's on the market. Even 3½" HDD's was still a novelty, seldom found in anything but portable computers. Both these machines were at the time dubbed as "Laptops" as it was possible to balance them on your lap, in theory at least. I think I tried that once with the Toshiba, and never felt compelled to try it again.

As I remember it the "Notebook" moniker was introduced when portables weighing less than 3kg started to appear. By that time the 2½" HDD's were widely available, and almost exclusively used in these "Notebook" class computers.

So going by those definitions you could most definitely have a "Laptop" with a couple of 3½" drives. I seem to remember something about a monstrous high performance dual Opteron "laptop" with two 3½" drive bays and RAID-1 & 0 support. It had it's 15 seconds of fame about a year ago. However I've never seen it IRL, nor heard from anyone who has touched it. Not even a friend of a friend whose dog once sniffed in the footprint of some one who has seen it, so it might have been a mirage...

(sorry for going of topic)

[Theo Wiegman]

When will this awesome piece of machinery grace the Leaderboard?

[Ron_Jeremy]

Quote

One thing that eludes me about WD. Why do they continue to avoid the SCSI market (as in why not make SCSI drives). And why hasn't any other company made other 10,000 SATA drives to directly compete with them???...

1. Because WD would be a very small player in the SCSI arena, facing Fujitsu & the Seagate/Maxtor goliath
2. Becasue doing so would infringe on their (very) lucrative SCSI business

[Shining Arcanine]

Ron_Jeremy, the 10,000 RPM Raptor doesn't fare well in mutiuser loads (i.e. the server market), being outperformed by every single one of its 10,000 RPM competitors, while mopping the floor with every single one of its 10,000 RPM competitors in single user loads (i.e. the desktop/workstation markets). How on earth does coming out with a 10,000 RPM SATA drive designed for single user loads infringe on their (very) lucrative SCSI business?

This post has been edited by Shining Arcanine: 08 January 2006 - 07:22 PM

[Spod]

As I understand it, the only difference is the cover. TLER is disabled by default on both versions, and a utility is available (somewhere) to enable it. They both get tested for 24 hours before leaving the factory, and they both have exactly the same firmware, apart from the model number. No difference in optimisations.

Of course, as soon as Eugene receives a production Raptor X, he'll be able to independently confirm the lack of differences. If the performance is almost identical (within sample variance), then the drive is identical... or else any variations cancel each other out, and are thus irrelevant.

[TechNet]

Spod, on Jan 9 2006, 12:07 PM, said:

As I understand it, the only difference is the cover. TLER is disabled by default on both versions, and a utility is available (somewhere) to enable it. They both get tested for 24 hours before leaving the factory, and they both have exactly the same firmware, apart from the model number. No difference in optimisations.

Of course, as soon as Eugene receives a production Raptor X, he'll be able to independently confirm the lack of differences. If the performance is almost identical (within sample variance), then the drive is identical... or else any variations cancel each other out, and are thus irrelevant.

I have an ongoing support/pre-sales call with WD regarding this drive and the WD4000YR and they are saying these is no such utility to disable/enable TLER. Very confused now!!

[jjwa]

My guess is it's either something they enable and disable by hardware, or by a different firmware, and because TLER is one of the things they use to 'create' enterprise disks, it is not something they'd want their customers be able to play around with. Can users flash firmware? Not sure, but I guess not. If it is possible though, we may discover in the future if that's where the difference is done.

[Eugene]

TechNet, on Jan 4 2006, 09:05 AM, said:

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

I have an inquiry in with WD on this... so far, they tell me that the TLER utility will also work with the RE2 series (in fact, as we've seen, the Raptor and the RE2 look very very similar electronically). Still waiting on availability/download information, I'll keep readers posted here.

[Wanou]

Good job !
But wait !
I'm the (not so) proud owner of 2 raptors 74Gb.
The first, dated 09/04, was a 00FLA0 firmware
The second, 12/04 was 00FLA1 firmware.

I've already found that the 00FLA0 firmware was completely buggy with TCQ enabled. Performance drops to 5400 rpm pio4 drive... Even HDTach shows only a flat 10Mb/sec data transfert rate...

the 00FLA1 is not exhibiting this type of problem.

I'm trying WDC to exchange both of these HDDs with 00FLC00 Firmware. But it's not very easy...

Anyone with a valid S/N for a 00FLC00 Raptor 74Gb to help me get the exchange?
TIA