Guest Eugene

Western Digital Raptor WD1500

Recommended Posts

I've bought a specimen as well, it was simply too tempting :D

On my Asus A8N SLI Premium, with nForce 4 SLI, you can simply deactivate NCQ in the properties box of the disc controllers in device manager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is TLER feature enabled or disabled on 150G raptor?

I see that the review say that the feature is disabled on both WD1500ADFD and WD1500AHFD, but WD FAQ says differently.

Specifications for the 150 GB Serial ATA Raptor® hard drive.

Killer Speed: World's fastest SATA drive: 10,000 RPM, 4.5 ms seek, 16 MB cache

Enterprise-class throughput, NCQ that optimizes the sequence of data transfers to the hard drive from the host, resulting in higher performance in enterprise applications.

Rugged, enterprise-class mechanical platform with high-end bearings and actuator

Unsurpassed Reliability: 5-year warranty and 1.2 million hours MTBF

RAID-specific, time-limited error recovery (TLER) — a feature unique to WD, prevents drive fallout caused by the extended hard drive error-recovery processes common to desktop drives.

Rotary Acceleration Feed Forward (RAFF™) — optimizes operation and performance when the drives are used in vibration-prone, multidrive systems such as rack-mounted servers or network storage.

http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc.cfg/ph...li=&p_topview=1

Specifications for the 150 GB Serial ATA Raptor X® Clear Cover hard drive.

Killer Speed: World's fastest SATA drive: 10,000 RPM, 4.5 ms seek, 16 MB cache

Rugged, enterprise-class mechanical platform with high-end bearings and actuator

Unsurpassed Reliability: 5-year warranty and 1.2 million hours MTBF

First ever drive with a large, crystal-clear lens on the drive that lets you see into the inner workings and witness the drive in action..

http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc.cfg/ph...F90ZXh0PXRsZXI*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WD is notorious (actualy, all the drive manufacturers are, to some extent) for posting inaccurate or conflicting specs on their website. Eugene will have talked to the technical guys at WD to clarify a few points for his review, and I'd say the review was probably correct: TLER is available, but disabled by default on both new Raptors.

I don't recall seeing any link to a utility to switch TLER on, so you may need to ask WD support about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all. This is my first post, and so I apologize in advance if I ask a silly question. But ... I am configuring a Dell. The real reason for the machine is that I need to be able to handle very large SAS or SPSS data sets (maybe 40-60 gig for some data sets). While I plan to have most of the data reside on a RAID 5 (Promise FastTrak SX4100) 4-drive (Seagate 7200.10) set, it turns out that Dell is offering a "160gb 10K RPM drive with 16mg databurst cache," which, though Dell will not admit it, must be the 150gb Raptor, unless there is a new 10K SATA drive suddenly on the market. I can configure with RAID 0 or RAID 1.

So, the question is, given my the actual reason for the new machine, does it make sense in terms of performance for these big data sets to go for two Raptors for the boot drive? If so, what is its performance in RAID 1 as opposed to RAID 0?

Currently, I use a remote server for these data sets, and it takes almost an hour to read the data set and write it out again with a few more variables!! It takes about 30 minutes to do frequencies for most of the variables (there are maybe 150?). This is catastrophic! And I am the only user at 11 pm! I would expect that the 4-drive combo would surpass the server. But my question is whether 2 RAIDED Raptors would surpass the 4-drive RAID 5. If so, I could do most of the work on the biggest data sets on the Raptors.

I hope I have been precise enough to help you help me!

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to SR!

Yes, that drive (if SATA) will be a Raptor. Using one Raptor for OS & programs would speed things up a bit, adding a second for RAID probably wouldn't be worth it. You're better off having a separate drive or array for data, even if that's based on 7200.10s.

As for the data (which I assume won't fit on one or two Raptors), do regular backups back to the server, and ensure the server is regularly backed up to media kept safely (preferably off site). Then there's no real need to use RAID 5 on your workstation, and RAID 0 will dramatically improve the sustained transfer rate (STR) over RAID 1 or 5. For most users, that won't do much, but in your case, working with seriously huge files, it should help a lot.

I would expect four 7200.10s in RAID 0 to manage more STR than two (more) Raptor 150s in RAID 0. And obviously you'd have much more capacity. If you were only going to need two drives for your data array, two Raptors would be faster than two 7200.10s, though perhaps the 750 GB drives would give the Raptor's STR a run for its money.

In short, I suggest 1 Raptor for OS plus 2 Raptors in RAID 0 for data, or 1 Raptor for OS plus 4 7200.10s in RAID 0 for data, dependign on your data capacity needs.

Oh, and technically, you should post any questions that are specific to your configuration in the Computing forum, rather than the general Raptor 150 article discussion, but since it's your first post, I'll forgive you! :)

Spod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome to SR!

Yes, that drive (if SATA) will be a Raptor. Using one Raptor for OS & programs would speed things up a bit, adding a second for RAID probably wouldn't be worth it. You're better off having a separate drive or array for data, even if that's based on 7200.10s.

As for the data (which I assume won't fit on one or two Raptors), do regular backups back to the server, and ensure the server is regularly backed up to media kept safely (preferably off site). Then there's no real need to use RAID 5 on your workstation, and RAID 0 will dramatically improve the sustained transfer rate (STR) over RAID 1 or 5. For most users, that won't do much, but in your case, working with seriously huge files, it should help a lot.

I would expect four 7200.10s in RAID 0 to manage more STR than two (more) Raptor 150s in RAID 0. And obviously you'd have much more capacity. If you were only going to need two drives for your data array, two Raptors would be faster than two 7200.10s, though perhaps the 750 GB drives would give the Raptor's STR a run for its money.

In short, I suggest 1 Raptor for OS plus 2 Raptors in RAID 0 for data, or 1 Raptor for OS plus 4 7200.10s in RAID 0 for data, dependign on your data capacity needs.

Oh, and technically, you should post any questions that are specific to your configuration in the Computing forum, rather than the general Raptor 150 article discussion, but since it's your first post, I'll forgive you! :)

Spod

Thanks so much, Spod!! I have a follow-up question regarding the 7200.10 & my configuration. But I'll post those in the appropriate spaces. srk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would there be a performance increase/decrease if the Raptor 150's were put in Raid 1 configuration? I like redundancy... I am a paranoid person :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on the controller and driver, sustained reads should be quicker, sustained writes would be similar to a single drive, and access times could be very slightly slower, some of the time. That applies to any drive in RAID 1, not just the Raptor 150.

For the most part, I'd suggest a different approach if you're looking to protect your data. 1 Raptor with OS and programs, but no documents, settings or other user files. 1 7200 RPM bulk storage drive with the pagefile, documents and settings and media collections etc. Image the OS drive to the bulk storage drive, and regularly back up the bulk storage drive to some form of external media, such as a USB hard drive, that is usually kept disconnected and in a different place from the PC (less likely to be nicked/burnt/infected by viruses/attacked by small children at the same time as the PC).

RAID 1 is good for sustained read speed, and minimising downtime in the event of drive failure. But backups and images are generally useful precautions against a much wider range of calamities.

Edit: oh, and welcome to SR!

Edited by Spod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Welcome to SR!

Yes, that drive (if SATA) will be a Raptor. Using one Raptor for OS & programs would speed things up a bit, adding a second for RAID probably wouldn't be worth it. You're better off having a separate drive or array for data, even if that's based on 7200.10s.

As for the data (which I assume won't fit on one or two Raptors), do regular backups back to the server, and ensure the server is regularly backed up to media kept safely (preferably off site). Then there's no real need to use RAID 5 on your workstation, and RAID 0 will dramatically improve the sustained transfer rate (STR) over RAID 1 or 5. For most users, that won't do much, but in your case, working with seriously huge files, it should help a lot.

I would expect four 7200.10s in RAID 0 to manage more STR than two (more) Raptor 150s in RAID 0. And obviously you'd have much more capacity. If you were only going to need two drives for your data array, two Raptors would be faster than two 7200.10s, though perhaps the 750 GB drives would give the Raptor's STR a run for its money.

In short, I suggest 1 Raptor for OS plus 2 Raptors in RAID 0 for data, or 1 Raptor for OS plus 4 7200.10s in RAID 0 for data, dependign on your data capacity needs.

Oh, and technically, you should post any questions that are specific to your configuration in the Computing forum, rather than the general Raptor 150 article discussion, but since it's your first post, I'll forgive you! :)

Spod

Spod, I hope it's not bad form to post a follow-up that involves a Dell issue, but as it relates to one thing we both discussed, it seems appropriate to mention it here.

Specifically, I have been assured by Dell that the 160GB 10,000 SATA drive is made by Dell and is not a Raptor. I find this almost impossible to believe. Is it possible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Specifically, I have been assured by Dell that the 160GB 10,000 SATA drive is made by Dell and is not a Raptor. I find this almost impossible to believe. Is it possible?

No, that's not possible. There is only one 10K rpm SATA drive on the market and it's the Raptor line. Dell apparently is the only customer of the 160 GB flavor (they probably cut a deal with WD) and they may choose to rebadge it so it's "not a Raptor," but they did not make the drive themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Specifically, I have been assured by Dell that the 160GB 10,000 SATA drive is made by Dell and is not a Raptor. I find this almost impossible to believe. Is it possible?

No, that's not possible. There is only one 10K rpm SATA drive on the market and it's the Raptor line. Dell apparently is the only customer of the 160 GB flavor (they probably cut a deal with WD) and they may choose to rebadge it so it's "not a Raptor," but they did not make the drive themselves.

Thanks for your reply, Mickey. In your opinion, how likely would it be that this drive performs worse than the (reviewed) 150 GB Raptor? Is it even 20% likely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Specifically, I have been assured by Dell that the 160GB 10,000 SATA drive is made by Dell and is not a Raptor. I find this almost impossible to believe. Is it possible?

No, that's not possible. There is only one 10K rpm SATA drive on the market and it's the Raptor line. Dell apparently is the only customer of the 160 GB flavor (they probably cut a deal with WD) and they may choose to rebadge it so it's "not a Raptor," but they did not make the drive themselves.

Thanks for your reply, Mickey. In your opinion, how likely would it be that this drive performs worse than the (reviewed) 150 GB Raptor? Is it even 20% likely?

Guys, I did a more comprehensive search than merely through Google, which led me to a DELL SITE:

http://www.dell.com/html/us/products/renegade/renegade.html

which refers to dual 160GB Raptors. I also heard that WD just short-stokes (?) its drives a bit for performance. If so, then presumably the performance is identical until one gets to the last 10ish GBs. Correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess it'd be comparable for the most part, though the additional 10 GB will negatively impact seeks somewhat. I doubt it'd be significantly worse, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! I've put my Raptor 150 into a Scythe Quiet Drive and now it's about 47°C hot, and it could get even hotter. Quiet Drive is good for nose reduction, now I don't hear my Raptor from the other room :) but isn't this too hot for it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eugene, will you be adding the WD360ADFD and WD740ADFD drives to the reliability database since they're a part of this family or are you going to review them first?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a note - WD finally got back to me regarding the Dell 160GB 10,000 RPM SATA drive that people here were confident was really a Raptor. WD confirmed that it did indeed build the drive just for Dell, and that the drive's performance is the same as the 150GB Raptor.

Happily, based on the info here, we had already reached this conclusion, and I had already ordered the computer with this hard drive. I just wanted to confirm officially that StorageReview.com gurus were absolutely right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is the 160gb disk cheaper than the 150gb raptor disk?

That'll be Dell's volume discount at work. They're probably one of WD's biggest single Raptor customers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi! I've put my Raptor 150 into a Scythe Quiet Drive and now it's about 47°C hot, and it could get even hotter. Quiet Drive is good for nose reduction, now I don't hear my Raptor from the other room :) but isn't this too hot for it?

Regarding the noise reduction, is it the idle noise or the seek noise that's gotten reduced?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While there's a bit of sample variance, no more so than is found within either line. In other words, (the Raptor 150 and Raptor X) are no more different from each other than (two Raptor 150s from different batches).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! I've put my Raptor 150 into a Scythe Quiet Drive and now it's about 47°C hot, and it could get even hotter. Quiet Drive is good for nose reduction, now I don't hear my Raptor from the other room :) but isn't this too hot for it?

Regarding the noise reduction, is it the idle noise or the seek noise that's gotten reduced?

I didn't have a problem with the idle noise. Now that you asked it, I've put my ears near it and I can hear the idle noise, but it's not disturbing. Or maybe I tought that's the noise from one of my fans :) I can't really tell. But it reduced the seek noise considerably. So it's worth it, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! I've put my Raptor 150 into a Scythe Quiet Drive and now it's about 47°C hot, and it could get even hotter. Quiet Drive is good for nose reduction, now I don't hear my Raptor from the other room :) but isn't this too hot for it?

Regarding the noise reduction, is it the idle noise or the seek noise that's gotten reduced?

I didn't have a problem with the idle noise. Now that you asked it, I've put my ears near it and I can hear the idle noise, but it's not disturbing. Or maybe I tought that's the noise from one of my fans :) I can't really tell. But it reduced the seek noise considerably. So it's worth it, I think.

Thanks for the tip, man. I'm gonna try it in my P180 and see if the silicone grommets in the lower drive bay do the trick. Otherwise I'll pick up a Scythe enclosure and suspend it with rubber wires.

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