WD740GD (Yes, the new Raptors)

[JustAnAverageGuy]

if the new 36.7 model is under $150, I'll probably get one of those ... unless the "old" 36.7 model gets extremly cheap really quickly.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: Pariah
You people obviously aren't SCSI owners. That's a pretty darn good price. Especially considering it hasn't been released yet. After the novelty wears off and the price normalizes at something lower, this drive will be pretty much unbeatable if it lives up to performance expectations.

I bought a Maxtor 36GB 10K IV U320 off eBay for $80.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

misread

*grumble*

Why no delete button

 

[syadnom]

what i do instead of raptors:

I have an 18.2GB seagate 15,000rpm scsi with 3.6ms access time on a scsi160 controller. whole setup cost me $90. This drive is far faster than a raptor and since i use it for my OS('s) and games, it is plent big for the job. I have other ata drives for storage because it doesn't need to be nearly as fast and wd1200jb's are just fine for that purpose.

The speed different is incredible loading apps or loading windows or linux. well worth $90

 

[roboninja]

Originally posted by: syadnom
what i do instead of raptors:

I have an 18.2GB seagate 15,000rpm scsi with 3.6ms access time on a scsi160 controller. whole setup cost me $90. This drive is far faster than a raptor and since i use it for my OS('s) and games, it is plent big for the job. I have other ata drives for storage because it doesn't need to be nearly as fast and wd1200jb's are just fine for that purpose.

The speed different is incredible loading apps or loading windows or linux. well worth $90

That sounds like a fairly good solution. Any hints as to where you came up with that gear at that price?

 

[mcveigh]

what are the model numbers so we can tell the old from the new?

 

[mcveigh]

Originally posted by: syadnom
what i do instead of raptors:

I have an 18.2GB seagate 15,000rpm scsi with 3.6ms access time on a scsi160 controller. whole setup cost me $90. This drive is far faster than a raptor and since i use it for my OS('s) and games, it is plent big for the job. I have other ata drives for storage because it doesn't need to be nearly as fast and wd1200jb's are just fine for that purpose.

The speed different is incredible loading apps or loading windows or linux. well worth $90

same as me I run a 15.3 cheetah 9 gig on a tekram U160 card.
I have some other scsi and ide drives for storage

 

[Vegito]

I wish there are more onboard SATA not through a third party chipset like promise or something.. native to the motherboard... also would be nice to see SATA optical drives..

I used up all my ide ports for hdd and all my optical are SCSI.. but there aren't much new scsi opticals..

 

[beatle]

Ok, so do these new Raptors support TS&CQ or not? With the arbitrator in place, I would think no, but who knows? Will the two drives be identical with the exception of the number of platters they use?

Also, I'm eager to get my hands on a new 36 gig drive if it comes with a FDB motor.

 

[sharkeeper]

Ok, so do these new Raptors support TS&CQ or not?

It's published specification so we must ASSume that it's there.

There will be reviews from Storage Review soon.

Cheers!

 

[JimRaynor]

That's the only thing holding me back right now, what I have heard about the "high pitched whine." If these babies are reasonably quiet, I'm all over that.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: mcveigh


same as me I run a 15.3 cheetah 9 gig on a tekram U160 card.
I have some other scsi and ide drives for storage

There are no Cheetah X15.3's in 9GB form. The minum for the X15.3 and the X15 36LP is 18GB. The 9GB goes to the first generation X15 Cheetah, which although fast, is considerably slower than the X15.3 and most of the newer 10K SCSI drives.

 

[mcveigh]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: mcveigh


same as me I run a 15.3 cheetah 9 gig on a tekram U160 card.
I have some other scsi and ide drives for storage

There are no Cheetah X15.3's in 9GB form. The minum for the X15.3 and the X15 36LP is 18GB. The 9GB goes to the first generation X15 Cheetah, which although fast, is considerably slower than the X15.3 and most of the newer 10K SCSI drives.

true. mine is an 18GB

 

[stickybytes]

i would get a raptor only if it wasnt so darn loud.
they had one on display on my local comp shop and they were loud babies!
i have my comp in my bedroom and i dont need anymore noise. the neighbors music is more than enough...

 

[oldfart]

Originally posted by: stickybytes
i would get a raptor only if it wasnt so darn loud.
they had one on display on my local comp shop and they were loud babies!
i have my comp in my bedroom and i dont need anymore noise. the neighbors music is more than enough...

What did you hear? The new 74 Gig drive or the 37 Gig drive? I've heard they are a bit on the loud side which has kept me away. 2 of them in RAID would not help. The new 74 Gig with the FDB is supposed to be better.

 

[MrEgo]

This is an enterprise drive? I thought you could only place a single SATA device per port? I know there's raid for SATA, but I see many servers with 4+ HDD's

SCSI still seems like a better idea for this market.... you can connect 15 (correct me if I'm wrong) devices on the same line?

 

[SocrPlyr]

Originally posted by: MrEgo
This is an enterprise drive? I thought you could only place a single SATA device per port? I know there's raid for SATA, but I see many servers with 4+ HDD's

SCSI still seems like a better idea for this market.... you can connect 15 (correct me if I'm wrong) devices on the same line?

I'm not saying which is better (SCSI probably is) but with SATA cards that can connect 4, 8, and 12 devices Link
go to page 2 and look at "Escalade Serial ATA RAID Controllers" and you will see what i am talking about
now really it is your call whether or not daisy chaining 15 drives (and setting SCSI IDs) and just hooking each one directly to the controller is better... to be honest i would probably prefer the second option...

Josh

 

[Vegito]

I'm not saying which is better (SCSI probably is) but with SATA cards that can connect 4, 8, and 12 devices Link
go to page 2 and look at "Escalade Serial ATA RAID Controllers" and you will see what i am talking about
now really it is your call whether or not daisy chaining 15 drives (and setting SCSI IDs) and just hooking each one directly to the controller is better... to be honest i would probably prefer the second option...

Josh

yeah thats the best and cheapest way to go, I was going to get one but they couldn't do raid between two escalade ata cards... ie I wanted to mirror between two cards so if one card fails, you can boot off the other card..

I got a AMI scsi card with 4 channel = 15 drive a channel, full size card = 60 drive

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: syadnom
what i do instead of raptors:

I have an 18.2GB seagate 15,000rpm scsi with 3.6ms access time on a scsi160 controller. whole setup cost me $90. This drive is far faster than a raptor and since i use it for my OS('s) and games, it is plent big for the job. I have other ata drives for storage because it doesn't need to be nearly as fast and wd1200jb's are just fine for that purpose.

The speed different is incredible loading apps or loading windows or linux. well worth $90

gimme links! that's a nice little boot drive setup.... now only if my computer were in a room by itself and not next to my bed...

 

[KristopherKubicki]

We added the Raptor drive to our guides--- get ready to watch the price fall!

http://www.anandtech.com/guides/priceguide.html

Kristopher

 

[Dormant]

I don't understand why WD wants to make the Raptor drives bigger. 36GB is more than enough for an O.S. I think the other improvements to the Raptor drives is a wonderful idea though. The FDB and faster access times are more than welcome. The harddrive companies should be using their resources to design 500GB 5400RPM drives with 1meg of cache. We need more cheap Mass-storage solutions to share massive amounts of DIVX/Xvid movies. I figure I could fit all of my Movies on a half-terra no problem, but I can't afford $500 Canadian per 250gb. Think about how nice it would be if you could bring a terrabyte over to a friends place in a hot-swapable caddy and move 10 years worth of movies in one night!

 

[Boonesmi]

Originally posted by: Dormant
I don't understand why WD wants to make the Raptor drives bigger. 36GB is more than enough for an O.S. I think the other improvements to the Raptor drives is a wonderful idea though. The FDB and faster access times are more than welcome. The harddrive companies should be using their resources to design 500GB 5400RPM drives with 1meg of cache. We need more cheap Mass-storage solutions to share massive amounts of DIVX/Xvid movies. I figure I could fit all of my Movies on a half-terra no problem, but I can't afford $500 Canadian per 250gb. Think about how nice it would be if you could bring a terrabyte over to a friends place in a hot-swapable caddy and move 10 years worth of movies in one night!

i for one dont want a 36gb harddrive... ive been waiting for the new raptors for months and months (80gb is about as small as im willing to go for my boot drive, and the 74gb raptor is close enough )

 

[tjaisv]

Originally posted by: Dormant
I don't understand why WD wants to make the Raptor drives bigger. 36GB is more than enough for an O.S. I think the other improvements to the Raptor drives is a wonderful idea though. The FDB and faster access times are more than welcome. The harddrive companies should be using their resources to design 500GB 5400RPM drives with 1meg of cache. We need more cheap Mass-storage solutions to share massive amounts of DIVX/Xvid movies. I figure I could fit all of my Movies on a half-terra no problem, but I can't afford $500 Canadian per 250gb. Think about how nice it would be if you could bring a terrabyte over to a friends place in a hot-swapable caddy and move 10 years worth of movies in one night!

Agreed. I have a bunch of dvd-r movies that i'd like to have stored on an hd in addition to having them burned to disks which is what i do now.

 

[Matthias99]

There was actually a thread in Highly Technical recently about this (they were specifically asking about *physically* larger drives, but since that's the only way other than increasing density or number of platters to do this...)

Basically, physically larger drives (like going back to 5.25" platters) suck for a number of reasons. The drive motors have to work harder, the rotational speed has to be lower, and your seek times (and especially seek time variance) are going to be worse no matter what. There may even be technological reasons why it's harder to get super-high magnetic storage densities on a larger platter. That said, if you can do it, your sequential read/write performance won't be much worse, and capacity per drive would be significantly larger. I personally think they could be very useful in medium-term backup situations, or for building PCs with large storage capabilities (for HD video editing, etc.) But most *companies* interested in having lots of storage capability really need something like a SAN or NAS, with better configurability, performance, and security options built in. And that's where all the money is. One good reason for drive companies *not* to develop these is that it would hose the (profitable) low-end NAS market (why buy a $150,000 box with 10TB of RAID storage when $20,000 worth of IDE hard drives mounted in a bunch of PCs can do the same thing?). The trend in computing today also seems to be towards smaller systems, not larger ones.

And come on. $500 canadian is like, what, $3US?

 

[tjaisv]

Originally posted by: Boonesmi

Originally posted by: Dormant
I don't understand why WD wants to make the Raptor drives bigger. 36GB is more than enough for an O.S. I think the other improvements to the Raptor drives is a wonderful idea though. The FDB and faster access times are more than welcome. The harddrive companies should be using their resources to design 500GB 5400RPM drives with 1meg of cache. We need more cheap Mass-storage solutions to share massive amounts of DIVX/Xvid movies. I figure I could fit all of my Movies on a half-terra no problem, but I can't afford $500 Canadian per 250gb. Think about how nice it would be if you could bring a terrabyte over to a friends place in a hot-swapable caddy and move 10 years worth of movies in one night!

i for one dont want a 36gb harddrive... ive been waiting for the new raptors for months and months (80gb is about as small as im willing to go for my boot drive, and the 74gb raptor is close enough )

Yeah for me 74GB is ideal for a boot drive. Of course the more the better, and i'm sure in time we'll probably see these Raptor drives weighing in at 200GB+, so that they can be used for both boot and storage. But right now, 74GB is good enough to hold me off.