Sign in to follow this  
orion24

VelociRaptor 6th gen

Recommended Posts

These drives need no introduction, but here it goes anyway

Manufacturer: WD

Family: Raptor

Released: Q2 2012

Notes:

Model Name (product family): WD VelociRaptor

Model Number: WD2500HHTZ, WD5000HHTZ, WD1000DHTZ

Capacity: 250, 500, 1000 GB

URL: http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=20

Interface: SATA 6Gb/sec

Spindle Speed: 10000 RPM

Seek: 6,9 ms

Buffer: 64 MB

Density: 333GB/platter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

always been curious about this- the 250 & 500 gb models are short stroked single & dual platter rt? the 1k gb makes full use of 3 platters. shouldnt there be some sort of speed advantage t othe short stroked vers?

tis a question that has been bugging me for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For short stroking they usually disable some of the slow inner part of the platter, hence increasing average STR and decreasing average access times due to shorter head travel paths. The 500 GB model wouldn't have to be 2 platter short stroked, though: they can use one full platter and only one side of a 2nd platter, yielding 333 + 0.5*333 = 500 GB capacity. Saves one read/write head.

MrS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrSpadge' timestamp='1343379425' post='276932']

For short stroking they usually disable some of the slow inner part of the platter, hence increasing average STR and decreasing average access times due to shorter head travel paths. The 500 GB model wouldn't have to be 2 platter short stroked, though: they can use one full platter and only one side of a 2nd platter, yielding 333 + 0.5*333 = 500 GB capacity. Saves one read/write head.

MrS

thx. guess my main point was - is y we dont see some sort of increased performance in the vers that are short stroked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thx. guess my main point was - is y we dont see some sort of increased performance in the vers that are short stroked?

WD never sent anything but the larger drive to reviewers. In the previous Raptor generation, nobody reviewed the 450GB Raptor officially and based on some end-user HD-tach HD-Tunes I've seen, I believe that early versions of the 450GB Raptor were done with remaining stock of the generation-before Raptors (150GB/fully enabled platter). Actually the transfer rate completely matched that of the 300GB and 150GB drives and was nowhere near than of the 600GB drive.

For drives that are really short-stroked, I expect them to use platters that have some kind of fault and can't be sold as fully enabled (otherwise it makes little sence not making them 333GB and 667GB as the production cost would be nearly the same). If the fault is at the inner part, then that area is disabled. If it is in the outer, then the outer is disabled. This would mean that not all of these drives perform equally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...

Not trying to be captain obvious, but your post is an a assumption, right?

WD did not post anything official, nor we can see a clear pattern in the individual drives, so we can recognize an error in the beginning or the end of the drive.

Anyway - I am also looking forward to some failure info, as the previous 5th gen Raptors were a "guaranteed dead man" on the 2nd year. I have 40% dead drives (out of 12 bought 5 have gone bad between the 18th and 24th month).

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