KingGremlin

Member
  • Content Count

    363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About KingGremlin

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Raleigh, NC
  1. Hey Eugene, I saw this on another forum and was wondering if you could confirm or deny this: "THe WD actually has 34 GB more than the seagate because of the way they measure their drives. (WD = 750,000 MB = formatted 732 GB, Seagate 750,000,000,000 B = 698 GB formatted) This data has been confirmed by WD's and Seagates spec sheets." WD's website does in fact list the capacity as 750,156 MB, so what are the formatted capacities of these two drives?
  2. KingGremlin

    Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000

    Wow, this drive is so fast, it sent Eugene into the future! Seriously though, nice drive. I know what the benchmarks say, but do you think this drive would really be faster than the Raptor in "real world" computers. ie... ones that aren't run off a clean image every time you boot up? Imagine one of these about half full with a typical amount of fragmentation for a home user, and I picture a drive that won't come close to the results it posted in this review. Obviously the Raptor would suffer performance degradation as well, but one would think it would be to a lower degree. Any thoughts?
  3. KingGremlin

    Where, oh where, are the Terabyte drives

    Assuming their website is accurate (people have reported getting drives from them), CDW has had them in stock for a while. http://www.cdw.com/shop/search/results.asp...mp;platform=all
  4. It appears that Raptors are entering an EOL phase. BestBuy has slashed prices on them significantly. I just picked up a 150GB Raptor X for $169.99, and there are reports of the 74GB Raptor selling for as little as $101, though $110 is more typical. By comparison, Newegg is selling the Raptor X for $200, which includes a $30 mail-in rebate.
  5. Reported availability this quarter. Time will tell. It doesn't appear you can link to pages within Hitachi's site, so here is the front page which has links all over about the drive. http://www.hitachigst.com
  6. KingGremlin

    15k.5 numbers posted

    Yes, lowlevel performance has been downplayed for a while now, but there should still be a limit to how little performance a drive manufacturer can pull out of the raw numbers a drive can produce. You can't judge the performance of a car simply by looking at HP numbers, but if a car has 400HP and records a 0-60 time of 11 seconds, people are going to be left scratching their head thinking what on earth did the engineers do to mess up the potential of that car so much? Absolute difference? Not much. However, if it's 45% better than the previous leader, with the 3rd fastest access time measurement to date, I certainly expect relative performance that is better than 40-60% slower than the previous generation competition in workstation performance which supposedly stresses localized access patterns which should benefit from the extreme STR numbers. This drive lost 4 out of 5 single user marks to the 250GB Samsung Spinpoint 120 (14.3ms, 71.3MB/s-41.5MB/s). I don't care how much you want to minimize the impact of lowlevel performance, that's embarrassing. No wonder Seagate bought Maxtor. Give this drive to Maxtor or Fujitsu engineers I bet they would have extracted significantly better performance out of it. Is this drive going to have a desktop and server mode like the 15k.4?
  7. KingGremlin

    15k.5 numbers posted

    The performance database has 15k.5 numbers posted now. Despite incredible low level performance, workstation performance is terrible. Eugene sure wasn't lying there. Is this the second sample, Eugene? Multi-user performance is pretty good, but certainly nothing exceptional when considering how tanked the single user performance is. Hopefully this is just a firmware issue that will be fixed before the drive reaches market.
  8. KingGremlin

    Any 15k.5 numbers yet?

    Thank you very much for the update, Eugene. I found in another thread that Seagate says these drives won't be in the distribution channels until October 6th. So much for "late second quarter."
  9. KingGremlin

    Any 15k.5 numbers yet?

    SR posted a month ago that the Cheetah 15K.5 was on the testbed being put through its paces. Are there any preliminary numbers to post yet? I know this is a stupid question, but any clue as to when these will be available for purchase? The impending Conroe has me looking to overhaul my system for the first time in years quite soon. If the 15k.5 can put a hurting on the Raptor, I'd probably wait, otherwise I'm sure I could save quite a bit of cash getting rid of SCSI and using onboard SATA.
  10. KingGremlin

    Can't we restructure this forum?

    I don't mean to offend you by this, but I find it ironic that someone is complaining about the organization and clarity of this forum by posting a giant one run-on sentence post that itself is difficult to decipher. I agree with the others, this site doesn't get enough traffic to warrant splitting up the categories. The SEARCH feature is your friend.
  11. That's a pretty impressive 50% increase over the current largest drive. Too bad it's Seagate. The race is now on to see what will happen first, the first working Star Trek transporter is demonstrated, or one of these drives is seen for sale somewhere. It's a PDF file as there is no web page for it yet: http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/...uda_7200_10.pdf
  12. KingGremlin

    Cheetah 15K.5 announced

    Whoaa... Slow down there slugger. You appear to have missed that this was Seagate making the announcement. Though the release says they will be shipping later this quarter, don't be deceived. While most companies would mean the April-May-June quarter, Seagate is referring to the first quarter of this century, so we should expect it in volume by the year 2025.
  13. KingGremlin

    Raptor 150 doubter

    It's in your head. With no direct comparison, and no hard numbers, just going by it feels faster than a slower model is about as poor a comprison as you can come up with. If there was any real difference, the 128MB caching controller is almost certainly the reason. SR did test a SAS version of the 15k.4 I believe, and there was no real difference between it and the P-SCSI version. Or maybe I'm remembering something that didn't happen, since I can't find the article. And in a related story, 100% of people regardless of age who died in a car accident last year, had never had a fatal accident before. Past successes are not an indication of future successes.
  14. KingGremlin

    New 150GB Raptor Versus...

    Drive is now available at Newegg for $300. $295 + $5 shipping.
  15. KingGremlin

    150GB Raptor appears on the horizon

    One more tragically poorly translated link: A WD Raptor of 150 Go! Announcement will reportedly be on Jan 3rd.