Sign in to follow this  
stephenm00

Raptor VS. Mau3147np

Recommended Posts

I am looking for the fastest set up. I have a abit motherboard with pic-e and native SATA II support. Would two raptors in raid 0 be faster or one Mau3147np (with a pci-e scsi adapter card). I know the disadvantages of raid 0 but I am just looking for a fast set up. This will be used as a desktop, so primarly gaming.

Thanks for the help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am looking for the fastest set up. I have a abit motherboard with pic-e and native SATA II support. Would two raptors in raid 0 be faster or one Mau3147np (with a pci-e scsi adapter card). I know the disadvantages of raid 0 but I am just looking for a fast set up. This will be used as a desktop, so primarly gaming.

Thanks for the help.

A single ADFD raptor should be faster than an MAU in a desktop system, not to mention vastly cheaper. I will certainly soon be "upgrading" my MAUs with raptors (as odd as it sounds)

Have a read through the Storage Review write-up of the WD1500ADFD :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick reply but how is that possible when the MAU scored faster on the storage review performance tests? Would you go with one WD1500ADFD or two in raid 0?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the quick reply but how is that possible when the MAU scored faster on the storage review performance tests? Would you go with one WD1500ADFD or two in raid 0?

http://www.storagereview.com/php/benchmark..._1=277&devCnt=2

at first glance it would indeed appear that the MAU scores considerably higher, but don't pay attention to the multi-user suite as that has no relevance to your situation.

With regards to the access time, it has little impact on desktop performance so the MAU's lead is mostly inconsiquential. The sustained transfer rates are close enough for you not to notice the difference in anything other than a benchmark. The raptor has a clean lead in the single-user drivemark scores and then its back and forth with the gaming tests. (to be honest, I only pay attention to the office and high-end drivemark scores)

There isnt a whole lot in it, so the only think you are likely to notice is the dent in your wallet and the added noise of the MAU (IMO)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oops, forgot about this bit...

I would never use RAID0 with any drives. If you search the forums you'll see many reasons why a lot of people reccommend against it (except for a few specific situations). I personally have never noticed much different in real performance between a single drive and RAID0 (certainly not enough to warrant the additional risk).

Have you considered getting a raptor for your system drive and an additional large, fast drive (or a few smaller drives in RAID5 for a bit of security) for storage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I allready have 2 7,000 RPM drives in raid 0 with one big storage drive for large files. I allready have raid-5 on my server so all important files would be on there. I really dont care about the unreliabilty of raid-0. What would these specific situations be? Gaming?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started using a RAID 0 on Atlas 10K drives 5 yrs ago for data, played with RAID0 for boot volume, never had a problem with the drives, Atlas 10K II, III, IV and 15Ks, plus Cheetah X15.2 pair.

there was a period when Mac OS X 10.0/1 wasn't up to the task, but been fine now for over 3 yrs. I had to break a RAID once to reformat the drives, and I think that was due to "operator error" and maybe beta driver.

I can't afford to buy large enough 73GB drive right now, and the 10K IVs perform like I want. My system is noticeably faster and smoother in operations. I wouldn't give up 15K boot drive unless someone gave me an SATA controller and Raptors. Hopefully I'll find an opportunity to get some new Atlas drives though until that happens. ;-)

I've tried 7.2k drives and I use them for one thing: backups and where huge DVD archives are concerned. it 'works' but you can tell it isn't as responsive.

And maybe its how OS X system and my needs rather than hardware or "impending unreliable risks" or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but my "friend" can get me a really good deal on Seagate Cheetah 15K.4. Would this drive be slower (for desktop use) then a single raptor? What about raid-0 raptor? I dont care about reliability/price/noise as much as performance.

Right now i have two hitachi deskstar hardrives in raid-0, how would the 15K and the raptors compare?

Again thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen how long can you wait? Seagates new 15k5 which is available to enterprise (big companies) now and to consumers by fall will probably be the fastest, the biggest 300GB model being maybe upto 20% faster that the 15k4 according to rules of thumb available in FAQ. This is likely to be $1000 plus if the current flagship 147GB 15k SCSI models are anything to go by. The 15k4 will be slower than the Raptors and the MAU's.

RAID 0 is likely to save you 30 seconds a day or something inconsequential like that when gaming all day. Have you ever thought about having seperate drives for your OS, Pagefile/Scratchfile and Program Files/ Games. You could then use your existing 7200rpm drives for back up and additional storage.

According to heresay on this website, doing this is likely to speed up your system and spread the risk in the event of drive failure. RAID 0 is pointless unless you are working with very large continguous files, such as when video editing.

I use a single 36GB MAU in my system with a Adaptec 39320A-R SCSI card in PCI slot. There is hardly any appreciable difference between that and my Seagate 7200.8 250GB for 95% of tasks/programs. The MAU is a tad "snappier" but the difference is not life changing. It certainly won't make you sit up and take notice, and is definately not worth the huge difference in price.

In short, get RAPTORs unless you can wait out for the 15k5. Or better yet, if your Hitachi drives are new and high capacity, just save yourself a bundle and stick with them and spend your money on better graphics cards, more RAM or a better processor, or even a huge monitor... all of which will give you more bang for your money for gaming than changing your Hard drives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I use a single 36GB MAU in my system with a Adaptec 39320A-R SCSI card in PCI slot. There is hardly any appreciable difference between that and my Seagate 7200.8 250GB for 95% of tasks/programs. The MAU is a tad "snappier" but the difference is not life changing. It certainly won't make you sit up and take notice, and is definately not worth the huge difference in price.

I have a pretty similar combo here, a 36 gig MAU hung out of a LSI HBA for my operating systems combined with a DM 10 for mass storage.

I'll need space RSN for a vista beta two install, the MAU is full. So my next OS disk is going to be a 73 gig ADFD Raptor. I couldnt justify the spend on a 73 gig MAU.

greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, a refurbished 146GB 15k.4 is the SAME PRICE as a new WD1500 Raptor after rebate. I went with 73GB refurbished 15k.3s over WD740GD previously, because I did not have chipset native SATA ports then. That is no longer the case now.

Decisions, decisions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm, a refurbished 146GB 15k.4 is the SAME PRICE as a new WD1500 Raptor after rebate. I went with 73GB refurbished 15k.3s over WD740GD previously, because I did not have chipset native SATA ports then. That is no longer the case now.

Decisions, decisions...

We dont have rebate programs on this side of the pond, shame really. It would help mitigate the $ -> £ rip off we suffer.

A new 73gig MAU costs more than a 150 gig raptor here in the UK.

Refurbished drives appear on ebay.co.uk occasionally.

greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seagate Cheetah 15K.4. Would this drive be slower (for desktop use) then a single raptor?
If you check the SR benchmarks, in desktop benchmarks, the latest Raptors rule over everything, and match or beat the currently reviewed 15K SCSI drives in desktop benchmarks.

Buy a Raptor 150GB or a 74GB in the latest revision (ADFD, I think?) and save the rest of your money. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would do as Student suggested. Get three drives. Put the OS on one, Program Files on another, and pagefile/temp on the third. You will see far more of a speedup with this setup than using two drives in RAID0 for everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so I bought the 160GB Raptor from Dell for $165 shipped with no rebate, and am not as impressed as I thought I'd be. Performance is OK as far as "responsiveness," seems about as fast as a 15k.3 so not bad at all. The problem is seek noise is FAR louder than even a 36Z15 and much lower in pitch; it's kind of a hollow echoing sound. Sounds exactly like an old 5400rpm 6.4GB Maxtor grinding away rather than any high-performance drive, though of course the idle noise level is impressively low.

That and my Ghost floppy can't see it unless I disable the first IDE channel (ICH5) in the BIOS.

I think I probably should have gone for the refurb 147GB 15k.4 for $225 shipped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having both a Raptor 150g and a Fujitsu MAU I can feel the difference. The MAU is more responsive and apps take less time to load. The difference wasn't woth the money spent on a nice SCSI HBA and a MAU.

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
Sign in to follow this