edge929

Next Generation Raptor?

Recommended Posts

Guest 888

I am correcting my message 3 posts above here:

In fact the prices for server and gamer models are exactly the same now (at same reseller). There was some confusing info initially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 888
when are they going to be available?

At least one of these swedish webshops I found stated the delivery date to be 06.JAN.2006 for the server version. The gamer version availability date is still unknown yet.

But don't take this as a statement, we have many times seen these dates changing at last minute...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Eugene
Keep in mind that you can pick up a 147GB 10k SCSI drive, cable, and appropriate host bus adapter for about that much, now.

But would it really be faster than a Raptor? "Its SCSI therefore its faster" is quite an archaic belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that you can pick up a 147GB 10k SCSI drive, cable, and appropriate host bus adapter for about that much, now.

But would it really be faster than a Raptor? "Its SCSI therefore its faster" is quite an archaic belief.

No, it wouldn't. I'll make a prediction right now the Raptor X is going to be named the fastest drive for single user usage, just like the original was.

Edited by Eugene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 888

One more interesting pricesheet:

http://www.osinet.fr/code/osicaddy.asp?bra...L+-+BULK+DRIVES

Finally, it is the first shop I have noticed listing the new Raptor to be conventional SATA:

WD1500ADFD RAPTOR 150GB SATA 1.5GB/S 10K RPM 4.5MS 16MB CACHE

But look there's more interesting items in the list:

WD740ADFD RAPTOR 74GB SATA 1.5GB/S 10K RPM 4.5MS 16MB CACHE

WD740GD-00FLA0 RAPTOR 74GB E-SATA 10KRPS 4.5MS

The second one is the old good Raptor but the first one has got a new model number! This is something completely new, isn't... 74GB Raptor with 16MB cache!

Additionally, these are also not listed on WD's site but are here (in fact they are already sold in many other places too):

WD3200JS CAVIAR SE 320GB SATA II 8MB 7200 RPM 4.2MS 300 MB/S

WD3200KS CAVIAR SE16 320GB SATA II 16MB 7200 RPM 4.2MS 300 MB/S

But the 4.2ms looks just a real error here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that you can pick up a 147GB 10k SCSI drive, cable, and appropriate host bus adapter for about that much, now.

But would it really be faster than a Raptor? "Its SCSI therefore its faster" is quite an archaic belief.

If you check closely, you'll see that nowhere in that post did I espouse such a belief.

Just because I can get it now, and it's far more reliable, does not mean that it is "faster." That's up to the user to figure out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 888

And now there are some signs around that the "very new" 74GB Raptor has also two versions:

WD740ADFD = for servers

WD740AHFD = for gamers

It really looks like an identical little brother of that new 150GB Raptor. May-be really with one platter only. And probably also this gamers version has some kind of "clear" design...

Still, no information about the 36GB Raptor's "very new" versions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps it's an outlet for 150 GB drives that failed QA on one of their platters. Some 36 GB Raptors have turned out to be 74 GB drives with one platter disabled, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Atlas 10K V vs 10K Raptor (NCQ and w/o)

As I already have a large number of cases, controllers and cables, and terminators, there's no "overhead cost" so for perfomrance, Atlas, hands down. The Raptor wins on noise and power consumption only. And because the Raptor is 74GB, the cost difference at zipzoomfly is ~$30, which is not going enough to be a factor or deal-breaker.

Comparing performance of the Atlas 15K II to Raptor, the Atlas doesn't even break into a sweat and makes an excellent drive, but just shy of $400 for 73GB, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that you can pick up a 147GB 10k SCSI drive, cable, and appropriate host bus adapter for about that much, now.

But would it really be faster than a Raptor? "Its SCSI therefore its faster" is quite an archaic belief.

No, it wouldn't. I'll make a prediction right now the Raptor X is going to be named the fastest drive for single user usage, just like the original was.

Totally agree. A single platter 150GB Raptor V3 will very likely top the MAU for single user performance.

Now for enterprise use, well if the last model is anything to go by, WD has their work cut out for them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A single platter 150GB Raptor V3 will very likely top the MAU for single user performance.

Realise, the Fujitsu MAU is now well over a year old. By your comparison, you're not saying much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A single platter 150GB Raptor V3 will very likely top the MAU for single user performance.

Realise, the Fujitsu MAU is now well over a year old. By your comparison, you're not saying much.

Believe it or not, your sarcasm does not make it any slower. ;) It's still the fastest drive for desktop usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Eugene has a new Raptor to test now, so he can have a review out to coincide with the release of the new Raptors. See his quote below in another thread:

Assuming that SR actually receives a 250 GB unit in the immediate future, I'm hoping to publish the roundup mid January. Before then, however, we'll present a first look at, well, a highly-anticipated product wink.gif.

Link to thread:

Linky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the performance database, I see that the review of the 7K500 is not linked to the results, still says that the review will be posted shortly...

Edited by sPECtre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A single platter 150GB Raptor V3 will very likely top the MAU for single user performance.

Realise, the Fujitsu MAU is now well over a year old. By your comparison, you're not saying much.

Believe it or not, your sarcasm does not make it any slower. It's still the fastest drive for desktop usage.

Perhaps your definition of sarcasm is different than the one I found in the dictionary.... anyway, I don't really think that the Fujitsu MAU is still the fastest drive for desktop usage -- or ever was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now