fastest single sata drive?

[fitseries3]

im getting tired of my RAID getting botched up from OC's gone berserk. im ditching the raided raptors for a single drive setup. im thinking about just going all in for a SSD but the size i want/need is WAY too much.

so my question is...

What SATA drive is gonna be the fastest and comparable to the raided raptors? im looking to stay below $300 on this... it shouldnt be that hard.

[Darknova]

Samsung Spinpoint F1.

either in 500Gb, or 1Tb size.

Faster than a Raptor X. Faster than any other drive available without going SCSI.

[Wile E]

But not as fast as raided raptors. The only way you can approach that, is SSD.

[Darknova]

But not as fast as raided raptors. The only way you can approach that, is SSD.

Well yeah, but you really can't expect to get a single SATA drive that's anywhere close to RAIDed drives in terms of performance.

[mrhuggles]

maybe samsung 7200.10 250gb firmware revision 3.AAC ?

[btarunr]

Compared to an array of Raptors? Single SATA drive? Welcome to 2015......oh maybe that's too late for a mechanical Winchester disk drive. There isn't any now.

[kylew]

Samsung Spinpoint F1.

either in 500Gb, or 1Tb size.

Faster than a Raptor X. Faster than any other drive available without going SCSI.

+1, I have 2 samsung 500GB drives, they are very fast, the best drives I've used. I also have 2 750GB Hitachi drives that I regret getting instead of 2 samsung 750GBs (the hitachis were cheaper). Now the samsung 1TB F1 drives have gone below £100, I'll be getting a few of them :D. Samsung HDDs all to way for me.

[btarunr]

Seagate Barracuda ST3500620AS is a fast one too.

[wiak]

Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 series is fast over 100 MB/s, i got two of them might get one or one more 1TB hehe, need to change those two 7200.10 320GB one to 500 or 1TB :P

[CrackerJack]

i got a good deal on my two WD 320gb sata drives, i get around 198 MB/s non-raid and 245 MB/s with

[btarunr]

i got a good deal on my two WD 320gb sata drives, i get around 198 MB/s non-raid and 245 MB/s with

That my dear, is burst speed, not sustained speed.

[mrhuggles]

yeah thats burst speed, i get just shy of 100mb/sec at the begining of my 7200.10 250gb 3.AAC drive, sustained, but burst is like 300 lol, i like the 250gb one cuz its the biggest one with only 1 platter

[btarunr]

You get ~300 MB/s burst for a single drive? (dunno which emoticon to use :twitch: / :wtf: / :confused:)

That's really high.

[mrhuggles]

this is my windows partition being benchmarked, wish i had another drive so i could bench mark it in a more pure enviornment, but its still pretty darn good.

not exactly 300mb/sec, but really high still

[oli_ramsay]

How do you change the firmware for hard drives? Could I put this 3.aac on my 320 GB 7200.10 IDE drive for better performance?

[twicksisted]

Im using the onboard Matrix controller on four WD320 RE1 drives:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a267/twicksisted/HDTachFourWD320RE1inRaid0.jpg

Im sure it would do much better with a dedicated SATA II raid adapter with memory onboard though.

-----------------
EDIT
-----------------

booted up in XP pro and got a higher score (was on vista ultimate 64bit for the previous test:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a267/twicksisted/HDTachFourWD320RE1Raid0-XPpro.jpg

I know that it dosent solve the "What single SATA drive is fastest", but it is interesting the diffs between XP & Vista 64bit... and also that the WD320 gig Raid edition drives arent that quick hehe

[lemonadesoda]

How do you change the firmware for hard drives? Could I put this 3.aac on my 320 GB 7200.10 IDE drive for better performance?
no, you cant. If I understand it correctly, the firmware includes various calibration coefficients for EACH DRIVE when set up in the factory. While in theory you could update the firmware... you wouldnt have the calibration data for your specific drive... and it would result in a NASTY fail.

[CrackerJack]

That my dear, is burst speed, not sustained speed.

yeah i know.

my dear??? :laugh:

[fitseries3]

here is my raptors. im trying to get close to this....

SSD is an option as long as it's 100+ gigs.

http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13621&stc=1&d=1208351095

[CrackerJack]

you like this one?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148309

or these
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145140

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148274

[GJSNeptune]

Western Digital WD6400AAKS.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

Samsung F1 or Seagate barra 7200.11

[CrackerJack]

Western Digital WD6400AAKS.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218

Wow, that's a nice deal :rockout:

[lemonadesoda]

here is my raptors. im trying to get close to this....

SSD is an option as long as it's 100+ gigs.

http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13621&stc=1&d=1208351095

Can you please explain that burst speed? Are you running a large cache controller? What model?

[mrhuggles]

lol, you CAN normaly update the firmware on drives.

that having been said, if you have a 7200.10 drive [do you have an 3.AAK drive?] then you cant because each one of those drives has different hardware.

due to this kind of situation, samsung is takeing back AAK drives, and replaceing them with a "replacement" it could be any revision, even another AAK so when you do it you are gambleing in a way, but kind of not because you can just return it again, untill they give you a good one...

if you DO have an AAK drive, you should trade it in, t he AAC and the AAK are 2 completely different drives performance and physical wise, i had one, it was not the same drive, it was thicker, and noiser... and hotter, it generaly sucked like a normal drive, and the AAC is like, what perpendicular was meant to be. you can tell from my benchmark, [note: thats the drive i boot off so thats why its a little weird]

[allen337]

Can you please explain that burst speed? Are you running a large cache controller? What model?

He is using Intel matrix storage raid with hard disk cashe enabled. ALLEN

[thebeephaha]

lol, you CAN normaly update the firmware on drives.

that having been said, if you have a 7200.10 drive [do you have an 3.AAK drive?] then you cant because each one of those drives has different hardware.

due to this kind of situation, samsung is takeing back AAK drives, and replaceing them with a "replacement" it could be any revision, even another AAK so when you do it you are gambleing in a way, but kind of not because you can just return it again, untill they give you a good one...

if you DO have an AAK drive, you should trade it in, t he AAC and the AAK are 2 completely different drives performance and physical wise, i had one, it was not the same drive, it was thicker, and noiser... and hotter, it generaly sucked like a normal drive, and the AAC is like, what perpendicular was meant to be. you can tell from my benchmark, [note: thats the drive i boot off so thats why its a little weird]

You mean seagate. Not samsung.

[GJSNeptune]

He means a lot of things. He just can't spell them correctly. ;)

[mrhuggles]

yeah. oops just woke up

[Wile E]

He is using Intel matrix storage raid with hard disk cashe enabled. ALLEN

Yep. Write back cache, FTW. lol. I have to give Intel credit, short of going with a dedicated controller, it doesn't get much better.

[fitseries3]

gotta love it!!! intel FTW!!!

[oli_ramsay]

Just got my Samsung F1 750GB 32MB cache today :D
Here's HDTune (HDtach doesn't work with Vista)

Samsumg F1 (was expecting +100MB/s :ohwell:)
http://img.techpowerup.org/080417/HDTune_Benchmark_SAMSUNG_HD753LJ.png

37GB Raptor 16MB cache:
http://img.techpowerup.org/080417/HDTune_Benchmark_WDC_WD360ADFD-00NLR4.png

PATA 320GB Barracuda 7200.10 16MB cache:
http://img.techpowerup.org/080417/HDTune_Benchmark_ST3320620A.png

[cdawall]

i have a samsung 320 AAE firmware....getting about 85mb/s sustained on an old via controller when its moved over to my new AM2 board i will post some shots :D

[Mussels]

i have a samsung 750GB 32MB cache, gets around 80-85MB/s over my network.

[Wetbehindtheears]

... (HDtach doesn't work with Vista)

Yes you can get it to run by going here:

HDTach (http://www.techfuzion.net/forums/index.php?topic=54.0)

[Mussels]

Yes you can get it to run by going here:

HDTach (http://www.techfuzion.net/forums/index.php?topic=54.0)

site requires a login.


Anyone got a bench they want me to run? i have samsung 250GB/8MB, 400GB/16MB 500GB 16MB cache, and 750GB/32MB i can test.

[Wetbehindtheears]

LOL Why not register it's free

Anyway heres the info:

.. do the following steps
1. Right Click on HD Tach
2. Click on the "Compatibility Tab"
3. Set it to "Run this program in Compatibility Mode to: Windows XP SP2"

Thanks go to arekieh @ TechFuzion :respect:

[bogmali]

37GB Raptor 16MB cache:

:confused::eek: I thought these only had 8 MB cache, is there a European model that has 16;) ? But that Samsung does have a sweet burst speed.

[fitseries3]

2x WD raptor x 150's...

http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13656&stc=1&d=1208444870



1 seagate 7200.11 1TB...

http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=13657&stc=1&d=1208445053

[fitseries3]

im thinking the raptors are king until i get a SSD.

[oli_ramsay]

:confused::eek: I thought these only had 8 MB cache, is there a European model that has 16;) ? But that Samsung does have a sweet burst speed.

Yea, the newer rev. 2 raptors have a sweet 16 MB of cache :)

http://www.westerndigital.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=189&Language=en

[Psychoholic]

I think ill have to vote for my new WD 640GB..

EDIT: my drives run around 45C at the moment, they're in the bottom of my P180 absolutely no airflow, and the fan quit last week... Hope that's not too hot, my seagate 7200.10 is always a few degrees warmer.

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/2572/post546326354656pz3.jpg

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/4707/hd1rx4.jpg

[GJSNeptune]

That's a decent temp. I wouldn't worry about it too much. They can withstand quite a bit of heat.

Looks like the 6400AAKS can withstand up to 140F (http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=394) (60C)

[niko084]

How are samsung F1s for reliability?

[farlex85]

Yea I think those new wd 640gb are supposed to be the fastest out atm. Seagate will probably answer soon.

[Psychoholic]

Ahh, cool.. ill probably grab a 120mm lowspeed fan to put down there anyways.

That's a decent temp. I wouldn't worry about it too much. They can withstand quite a bit of heat.

Looks like the 6400AAKS can withstand up to 140F (http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=394) (60C)

[twicksisted]

Well after seeing people using HD Tach, I decided to give it a go... I got really low scores comparitevely before with my 4 disk raid setup opposed to people with single disk setups!!!

Anyways looks a bit better with HDtach

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a267/twicksisted/HDtachRaidbenchWD320gigX4.jpg

[spearman914]

Raptors are the fastest ones. Don't know about the 15K RPM ones but I've heard Raptors still beat the 15K RPM drives. OMG!!

[GJSNeptune]

Raptors are aptly named. They scream in more ways than one. ;)

[fitseries3]

damn man.... i should get 2 more raptors!

[twicksisted]

still... in all seriousness... everyone goes on about raptors etc... but in reality youll be hard pressed to feel the speed difference between raid / non raid in everyday use... we talking about minor speed differences here...

I honestly cant feel any difference between my 4 disk Raid setup and my other rig with a spinpoint 250gb in...

I dont really think it makes much difference atall... I think that the £200 spent on raiding raptors could be better spent elsewhere (cooling, gfx, ram, cpu).

I know I wont be raiding conventional disks again when these die... I'll spend my money on other neccessary goods like TEC cooling :P

[Mussels]

still... in all seriousness... everyone goes on about raptors etc... but in reality youll be hard pressed to feel the speed difference between raid / non raid in everyday use... we talking about minor speed differences here...

I honestly cant feel any difference between my 4 disk Raid setup and my other rig with a spinpoint 250gb in...

I dont really think it makes much difference atall... I think that the £200 spent on raiding raptors could be better spent elsewhere (cooling, gfx, ram, cpu).

I know I wont be raiding conventional disks again when these die... I'll spend my money on other neccessary goods like TEC cooling :P

depends on use - my raptor system is significantly faster than the old 160GB IDE drive that was in there - but its barely (almost unoticeable) faster than my 500GB samsung. Raptors are great, but normal drives are catching up - if you REALLY want speed go grab an SSD drive - i've seen 32GB models on the market for huge ass prices arleady.

[fitseries3]

i run a shop so i ordered 20 raptor X 150's for $84 each and sold all but 2 that i use. so dont go bitching about price to me.

i want a 128gig SSD but the price is OUT OF THIS WORLD crazy and i cant justify THAT price at all.

[Mussels]

i run a shop so i ordered 20 raptor X 150's for $84 each and sold all but 2 that i use. so dont go bitching about price to me.

i want a 128gig SSD but the price is OUT OF THIS WORLD crazy and i cant justify THAT price at all.

lol you made quite the profit with the raptor i biought didnt you!

I've seen a 32GB SSD for <$300, but its max speed was 30MB/s

[niko084]

Anyone comment on how reliable Samsung F1's are or know how long the warranty is?

[Mussels]

Anyone comment on how reliable Samsung F1's are or know how long the warranty is?

well my 750GB hasnt broken yet, but i've only had it 2 weeks.
During that time its been mostly used as an external drive and moved around a lot.

[niko084]

well my 750GB hasnt broken yet, but i've only had it 2 weeks.
During that time its been mostly used as an external drive and moved around a lot.

I was considering them for a server, set of 2 in stripe or 3 in raid 5.....
Not sure how I will do it, but I would rater not risk a drive, and if I have to give up some performance for the stability of the enterprise WD drives I'll do that.

[Mussels]

I was considering them for a server, set of 2 in stripe or 3 in raid 5.....
Not sure how I will do it, but I would rater not risk a drive, and if I have to give up some performance for the stability of the enterprise WD drives I'll do that.

well overal samsung have been good to me, only had one fail out of the 50 or so i've used in the last 3 years. That said, i always cool drives and never move them when they're running.

[Wile E]

still... in all seriousness... everyone goes on about raptors etc... but in reality youll be hard pressed to feel the speed difference between raid / non raid in everyday use... we talking about minor speed differences here...

I honestly cant feel any difference between my 4 disk Raid setup and my other rig with a spinpoint 250gb in...

I dont really think it makes much difference atall... I think that the £200 spent on raiding raptors could be better spent elsewhere (cooling, gfx, ram, cpu).

I know I wont be raiding conventional disks again when these die... I'll spend my money on other neccessary goods like TEC cooling :PA RAID array makes a noticeable difference in most content creation apps, like PS, encoding, audio recording, etc.

[twicksisted]

A RAID array makes a noticeable difference in most content creation apps, like PS, encoding, audio recording, etc.

Im sure it does... but i dont really feel the extra boost its giving.
I am a music producer and record a maximum of 12channels at once 24/96khz (two Maudio delta 10/10's). so you would think that this would apply to me.(thats a lot of streaming information written straight to disk).

Also, you would have to be a seriously high DPI graphic designer to make PS work properly enough to need a raid scratch disk. Most PS files for web work are tiny and only get big if you designing a Billboard sized advert in 300dpi etc..with the cheap price of Ram nowdays youd be better off buying 8gb ram than raiding HDD's for photoshop.

Anyways, my array looks good in benchmarks so i wont moan, but for my uses i could be just as well served using a standard modern SATAII drive and wouldnt feel much of a difference.

[Wile E]

Im sure it does... but i dont really feel the extra boost its giving.
I am a music producer and record a maximum of 12channels at once 24/96khz (two Maudio delta 10/10's). so you would think that this would apply to me.(thats a lot of streaming information written straight to disk).

Also, you would have to be a seriously high DPI graphic designer to make PS work properly enough to need a raid scratch disk. Most PS files for web work are tiny and only get big if you designing a Billboard sized advert in 300dpi etc..with the cheap price of Ram nowdays youd be better off buying 8gb ram than raiding HDD's for photoshop.

Anyways, my array looks good in benchmarks so i wont moan, but for my uses i could be just as well served using a standard modern SATAII drive and wouldnt feel much of a difference.I don't know the details on PS, but it's rather easy to punish the hard drives with audio recording/production. Some of the stuff we work on has over 120 simultaneous tracks (Industrial music). The raid actually did make a difference.

[twicksisted]

well cant argue that hehe... 120 tracks and youd need a serious HDD's to record those channels simultaneously!

Just saying that for the users on this sit who reading this... overclocking CPU's, Ram, GFX has validity and real performance increases... But I dont think that anyone here really needs raid or even feels the benefit of it due to their useage of their computers (gaming, overclocking, etc...)

[Wile E]

well cant argue that hehe... 120 tracks and youd need a serious HDD's to record those channels simultaneously!

Just saying that for the users on this sit who reading this... overclocking CPU's, Ram, GFX has validity and real performance increases... But I dont think that anyone here really needs raid or even feels the benefit of it due to their useage of their computers (gaming, overclocking, etc...)

Yeah, that I can agree with. I noticed a small difference on this rig when getting the second 320GB 7200.10, but nothing to write home about. Just isn't all that necessary for a 3dMark/gaming rig. Although it does help PCMark scores. lol.

[Mussels]

the only thing i'd use RAID for is network transfers over my gigabit - but then BOTH systems would need raid. as it is, i feel individual drives are safer while still being quite fast.

[GSG-9]

My raid setup (SATAII) kills my old IDE set up, I dont really have much else to compare it to. I love my seagate drives, I have not compared the raid to nonraid scores, I just have the raid ones which I have not looked at for a while.

[niko084]

well cant argue that hehe... 120 tracks and youd need a serious HDD's to record those channels simultaneously!

Just saying that for the users on this sit who reading this... overclocking CPU's, Ram, GFX has validity and real performance increases... But I dont think that anyone here really needs raid or even feels the benefit of it due to their useage of their computers (gaming, overclocking, etc...)

I do, have a 4 0+1 raid 147gb Raptor 10k drives in my production machine, and considering switching them to 147gb Seagate Cheeta 15k scsi drives, also has 8gb of ram, been considering going to 16gb of ram and a xeon 5 series quad core, and possibly adding another at a later date, but would need a different board.

[asb2106]

i run a shop so i ordered 20 raptor X 150's for $84 each and sold all but 2 that i use. so dont go bitching about price to me.

i want a 128gig SSD but the price is OUT OF THIS WORLD crazy and i cant justify THAT price at all.

If you do that again, let me know, Ill buy two from yah!

[fitseries3]

LOL! my moneys have been pretty tight lately. im hoping to sell a few things from my FS thread soon.

how much are you guys willing to pay for a NIB sealed raptor X 150?

[niko084]

LOL! my moneys have been pretty tight lately. im hoping to sell a few things from my FS thread soon.

how much are you guys willing to pay for a NIB sealed raptor X 150?

How much you think you want?
I could probably use 1-2 more.

[fitseries3]

make me some offers guys. i may get another lot of them.

[asb2106]

Ill pay 230 for two! all day!

[fitseries3]

well... how's $140 each?

[asb2106]

well... how's $140 each?

ill buy 1 at that

[Mussels]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227294

fastest single drive!

OCZ SSD... pity at the price.

[GJSNeptune]

The new WD VelociRaptors. :D

(Don't shop at Newegg for SSDs. Right now, Mtron SSDs are the only way to go.)

[fitseries3]

hmmm... after seeing some benches with SSD's... i have found that the raptors still have the leading hand.

i think i have change my mind and i am actually going to be getting 2 velociraptor 300's for raid 0. that otta be smoking fast.

[twicksisted]

hehe, why stop at 2... why not four :P
or actually since you using your onboard raid... why not get a dedicated Raid Card that should speed them up a lot :)

[fitseries3]

$600 is alot for 2 drives. luckily i can bulk order them and get a better deal.

[asb2106]

$600 is alot for 2 drives. luckily i can bulk order them and get a better deal.

how many you have to buy to bulk order? You could share this with us :D

[fitseries3]

that's the part that sucks. minimum of 20.

[GJSNeptune]

Don't jump on the VelociRaptors just yet. WD stated that the firmware is about 90% complete. There's a big speed drop on the outer part of the platters (where it should be fastest).

You could buy some and wait for the firmware, but maybe by the time it comes out, they'll be a little cheaper.

[twicksisted]

how many you have to buy to bulk order? You could share this with us :D

you lucky you in the US... thats about what id pay for two Raptor X drives in UK ;)

actually not, they dropped a bit in price over the last few months hehe... still for the new velociraptor its £260!!! in UK

[asb2106]

you lucky you in the US... thats about what id pay for two Raptor X drives in UK ;)

actually not, they dropped a bit in price over the last few months hehe... still for the new velociraptor its £260!!! in UK

OUCH! I have always been happy about our prices here. Especially because of how fast the new stuff comes out, and the prices plummet fast!

I wasnt aware of the firmware issue, because of that I think Im gonna wait for awhile. I think Im just gonna get another Raptor X and raid my two!!

[ElWapo973]

i run a shop so i ordered 20 raptor X 150's for $84 each and sold all but 2 that i use. so dont go bitching about price to me.

i want a 128gig SSD but the price is OUT OF THIS WORLD crazy and i cant justify THAT price at all.

Wow this is the second time I've seen you post a really good price on the stuff you purchase in bulk(remembers an old WolfdaleE8400 thread). I run a small business out here in Jersey(mostly building/fixing/upgrading PCs here locally). However my suppliers/distributors try to rape me on every purchse I make. Even though it's well within my budget to purchase bulk quantities like those you mentioned. Fit would you mind PMing me who your source(s) is(are) for parts? It's been a bit frustrating of late with all the price fluctuations going on and my margins are tight as is. Any info or advice you could give would be appreciated. Sorry to stray off topic.

Back on Topic: Yeah I saw the announcement/reviews for the new VelociRaptor a few days back. You should have seen the glimmer in my eye. Boy was this beauty way overdue. From the few Reviews I read it seems to be quite the performer. I will definitely be keeping an eye on this one in the following weeks. Hopefully WD will have all the kinks worked out by then. :toast:

[Wile E]

I wish they would releaser some of their 15k rpm drives in a SATA II interface.

[Franklinwallbrown]

I wish they would releaser some of their 15k rpm drives in a SATA II interface.

+1! Oh, yeah!

[fitseries3]

ok... who wanted a raptor x? i have ONE for sale. PM me.

[mrhuggles]

this looks alot better, hmm, i dont understand that solid state drive is 100mb/sec? this one is almost that fast at the begining, or even as fast? or am i reading it wrong

[fitseries3]

all the SSD's ive seen REAL benches from do 60mb/s solid. but not any faster.

[mrhuggles]

my drive keeps getting overlooked for performance/cost :( is it the best? its the best single drive ive seen real benchmarks out of

[GSG-9]

my drive keeps getting overlooked for performance/cost :( is it the best? its the best single drive ive seen real benchmarks out of

I like em :)

[Mussels]

looks like you do have a fast dive there huggles, cant argue that. the difference with an SSD would be the higher minimum, and shiteloads faster access times

fitseries3: was that the new ones like OCZs advertised of the fast speeds, or an older one? i'm seeing a few cheap 32GB SSD's around, but they claim 30MB/s speed at best.

[mrhuggles]

fair enough, what are the benches like out of single raptor drives? i almost never see benchmarks from those that actually look good [probably from really old drives only?]

[coodiggy]

Raptor ADFD?
Look at the sustained write/read MBps of the single adfd, along with the windows startup times and MBps on the Hard drive charts at toms hardware..

Ignore the ratings for burst transfer from CACHE, because it takes the same amount of time, gives same on the fly results, for READS as the numbers show for the first couple seconds of sustained read tests in hd-tach. It's due to the disk's physical limmitations of reading from the platters, in order to fill the cache. Once it's in cache, then it's quite fast but if that's what you want, might as well be configuring a cheaper ram drive with a wd250gb or wd500gb or other cheaper HD for storage.

[mrhuggles]

those benchmarks are designed so you dont have to ignore the first few seconds of that, thats why they have a different test between sustained and burst [easy mistake to make] its just buffered is all, unbuffered performance isnt so important now a days really :? imho

so anyways, fastest single SATA drive.... i guess it greatly depends on what characteristics you are baseing it on. fastest access times should be solid state? fastest non solid state access times, the raptors, and fastest raw copy speed at the begining of the drive, AAC 7200.10
?

[twicksisted]

hold on a sec though... (or should I say milli-sec (ms)... or 1 millionth of a second).... but we are talking about milliseconds here for both the SSD & normal HDD's in access time.

As if a couple of milliseconds worth of pre cache seek time before bursting speed is going to make a noticeable difference when opening up a file.

so no... i personally dont think that SSD is anywhere near as good as normal Sata raid on modern drives yet

[mrhuggles]

normal sata raid? what about normal sata non-raid?

[lemonadesoda]

^^ twicksisted

Couple of points:

#1, assume your drive is not 100% defragmented
#2, assume your OS requires loading LOTS of small files, like drivers, dll's, gif's, jpgs, fonts, etc

If the main factor is sum(seek time for each file x hundreds of small files) = SSD wins.

If the main factor is sum(sustained transfer rates x a few files) = HDD wins.

[asb2106]

hold on a sec though... (or should I say milli-sec (ms)... or 1 millionth of a second).... but we are talking about milliseconds here for both the SSD & normal HDD's in access time.

As if a couple of milliseconds worth of pre cache seek time before bursting speed is going to make a noticeable difference when opening up a file.

so no... i personally don't think that SSD is anywhere near as good as normal Sata raid on modern drives yet

I agree, not only on performance wise, but price wise! Im not spending 500 bucks on a 128bg drive when I can raid 2 raptors for 300, its less and faster, tough choice........

Im totally excited for when SSD comes down in price! I will be all over it. But its just not there yet......

^^ twicksisted

Couple of points:

#1, assume your drive is not 100% defragmented
#2, assume your OS requires loading LOTS of small files, like drivers, dll's, gif's, jpgs, fonts, etc

If the main factor is sum(seek time for each file x hundreds of small files) = SSD wins.

If the main factor is sum(sustained transfer rates x a few files) = HDD wins.

very true, but isnt the difference minimal at best? compared to a raid?

[lemonadesoda]

^^ I find it very hard to set up a RAID array in my laptop! :roll:

There will be situations where the SSD really wins out... for example database/directory searches. A server could service 10x as many search requests for small data items compared to a raid array. But for a normal desktop/workstation/gaming PC, a RAID is still a much better price/performance.

[twicksisted]

but 30MB p/sec avg/sustained speed.... that what these drives currently are at.
single SATA drive speeds (7200rpm) beat that hands down (mine being 200MB/ p/sec... on raid, but still)... only difference being the access time (which again is in milliseconds..) thats so fast you cant comprehend it ;)

[fitseries3]

so does anyone want to buy this raptor from me for $150? it's sealed in the box still.

[twicksisted]

[QUOTE=lemonadesoda;774919]^^ I find it very hard to set up a RAID array in my laptop! :roll:QUOTE]

do you have a 7200rpm laptop HDD?... that will; be money better spent ;)

also... this all goes back to me not even noticing the real world difference between my 200MB p/sec four disk raid setup and my other rig which has a single Sata Samsung spinpoint drive ;)

[asb2106]

^^ I find it very hard to set up a RAID array in my laptop! :roll:

There will be situations where the SSD really wins out... for example database/directory searches. A server could service 10x as many search requests for small data items compared to a raid array. But for a normal desktop/workstation/gaming PC, a RAID is still a much better price/performance.

good call! Didnt know it was a laptop under discussion, my fault :toast:

[twicksisted]

lol there i go... off topic.....
sorry about that i was just having a rant at how SSD's are really dissapointing at this stage in the game and they trying to flog them off at ridiculously high prices...

I mean c'mon... the only people who would consider buying an SSD at this stage of the game knows their shit and knows that its currently offering shit performance ;)

[fitseries3]

SSD = shitty speed drive

[coodiggy]

ssd's go well in cars and tanks n jets that have high g's and heavy vibrations.

[Mussels]

hold on a sec though... (or should I say milli-sec (ms)... or 1 millionth of a second).... but we are talking about milliseconds here for both the SSD & normal HDD's in access time.

As if a couple of milliseconds worth of pre cache seek time before bursting speed is going to make a noticeable difference when opening up a file.

so no... i personally dont think that SSD is anywhere near as good as normal Sata raid on modern drives yet

normal hard drives are between 5 and 15ms. SSD's are nanoseconds. if you think knocking even 5ms off for a 33% decrease in latency 'a few milliseconds' makes no difference, you are very wrong.

i also think i mentioned theres at least two kinds of SSD's - there are older ones that do around 30MB/s that have been out for years, and the newer ones claimed to break 100 (such as the OCZ one) - i dont know how to tell the two types apart except in speed, but it may be worth noting most on the market today are the slower kind.

[Kursah]

I'm looking at snagging a 750GB HDD...since there are some decent onces around the price I got this 500GB seagate 'cuda a year ago...my choices are down to the 7200.11 750GB Seagate for $130 w/free s/h and the Samsung Spinpoint F1 750GB for $119 free s/h...link to Samsung:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152100

From what little I've read it seems the Samsung's are hot stuff...just kinda wanted to make sure before I made a decision. Giving my 500GB to my G/F's rig, working on getting her updated to newer hardware...here PATA drives gotta go...they total 220GB anyways lol! My 7200.9 Seagate has been a good drive, granted a little noisy, and not the quickest, it's done pretty good. I installed a 250GB 7200.11 in a buddie's rig not too long ago and it ran quick, quiet and was pretty sweet. I prefer to have one larger drive in comparison to a few smaller ones...I don't mess with RAID on my personal stuff, just personal choice I suppose. It will get partitioned to have an OS partition and an Everything Else Partition like my current 500GB is, and I'm content with that method.

Again, just wanted to make sure that was a good drive at a good price. Thanks!

:toast:

[Mussels]

I'm looking at snagging a 750GB HDD...since there are some decent onces around the price I got this 500GB seagate 'cuda a year ago...my choices are down to the 7200.11 750GB Seagate for $130 w/free s/h and the Samsung Spinpoint F1 750GB for $119 free s/h...link to Samsung:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152100

From what little I've read it seems the Samsung's are hot stuff...just kinda wanted to make sure before I made a decision. Giving my 500GB to my G/F's rig, working on getting her updated to newer hardware...here PATA drives gotta go...they total 220GB anyways lol! My 7200.9 Seagate has been a good drive, granted a little noisy, and not the quickest, it's done pretty good. I installed a 250GB 7200.11 in a buddie's rig not too long ago and it ran quick, quiet and was pretty sweet. I prefer to have one larger drive in comparison to a few smaller ones...I don't mess with RAID on my personal stuff, just personal choice I suppose. It will get partitioned to have an OS partition and an Everything Else Partition like my current 500GB is, and I'm content with that method.

Again, just wanted to make sure that was a good drive at a good price. Thanks!

:toast:

i have a 750 samsung, its slightly louder noise than the 500 (and i do mean slightly, and its only the whine noise - not seeks) its also quite a bit faster, i have seen 85MB/s transferring files in vista.

[Kursah]

i have a 750 samsung, its slightly louder noise than the 500 (and i do mean slightly, and its only the whine noise - not seeks) its also quite a bit faster, i have seen 85MB/s transferring files in vista.

Would you recommend that Spinpoint F1? The reviews are mostly good, same with the Seagate version...I've been pretty strictly Seagate or Maxtor for years...but it seems Samsung has something pretty appealing here. I want decent performance and reliability...noise isn't that big of a deal...it won't be any louder than my current 7200.9 500GB...that thing's always been a noisy bugger...but damn dependable! I've only mustered a best of 55MB/s in HDTach with it.

[Mussels]

Would you recommend that Spinpoint F1? The reviews are mostly good, same with the Seagate version...I've been pretty strictly Seagate or Maxtor for years...but it seems Samsung has something pretty appealing here. I want decent performance and reliability...noise isn't that big of a deal...it won't be any louder than my current 7200.9 500GB...that thing's always been a noisy bugger...but damn dependable! I've only mustered a best of 55MB/s in HDTach with it.

i heavily reccomend the 500's after experience, and the 750 appears just as reliable. i have no problems reccomending it.

[Kursah]

Well I'm not seeing any 500GB F1's on newegg atm...just the 750GB and 1TB...with a $100 price difference between the two. I'd go for 1TB drives if they were cheaper...my budget is tight...so I can do $120...and I figure if I can get a little more performance and a bit more space, at the same price I paid for less and slower a year ago...then why not? :D

I will do some snooping and see what else I can find for prices...this isn't my sure-fire choice yet, but it's about 90% atm.

:toast:

[Mussels]

Well I'm not seeing any 500GB F1's on newegg atm...just the 750GB and 1TB...with a $100 price difference between the two. I'd go for 1TB drives if they were cheaper...my budget is tight...so I can do $120...and I figure if I can get a little more performance and a bit more space, at the same price I paid for less and slower a year ago...then why not? :D

I will do some snooping and see what else I can find for prices...this isn't my sure-fire choice yet, but it's about 90% atm.

:toast:

the 500 was not from the F1 series - thats why i'm differentiating them in my posts. From what i've read, the 1TB models have some sort of problem, advice i was given was to stick with 750's.

[Kursah]

kk..thanks for your help so far...what about the WD 640GB 2x320GB platter drives? This one is a little cheaper..sure I'm shorted on space, so unless it's worthy I may still go with the 750gb...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218

It seems to rate better on Customer Reviews on the 'Egg, that's definately a plus. It's a good deal for sure, and so is the Samsung 750GB imo. If you had to choose between the two...what would you do?

EDIT: Still debating, reading some pro reviews now after sorting through a bunch of cust reviews of each and some random threads via Google...it does seem the WDC 640GB 2 platter is a pretty damn good drive, with a little more performance...not that I NEED a ton of space, I still have about 130GB free on my 2nd partitoin (20GB for OS atm, with 6GB free), and that includes a 150GB backup of my G/F's PC stuff...

The Spinpoint F1 750 is a good deal for a lot of space, at the cost of slightly less performance and it seems a higher failure rate, but in the end it still seems to be a good drive...I guess if I want a less space, a little less strain on the wallet, and a little more performance the 640 is the way to go! I am just hoping to hear a little more from the people I trust here on TPU...I can read and research all I want, but I still like to hear the recommendations made by my fellow TPU'ers as I value the suggestions here.

Thanks again!

[Kursah]

Alright I've done a lot of reading, can't really find a lot in the pro-review realm on WD SE16 640 vs Samsung F1 750...but in the consumer field, it seems that users are happier with the 640 HDD's and feel the loss in space is made up for in other areas. I've read a ton of info over the last couple of hours now, and it does seem that both drives are fairly close in performance in most areas, it seems failure rate is higher for the F1's, and the WD's seem to perform a tad faster (see page 2 iirc of this thread, one post has the F1 750 another has the WD 640)...synthetic benches are only so accurate as in any component test, so I take that with a grain of salt...but I do take seriously what users take from their experiences.

Kind of a tough decision with a $10 price difference, and 110GB advertised difference in space, but I want something dependable, speedy, roomy and cheap...kind of tough, so I gotta take the SE16 640 this round. I feel it'll treat me better for the gaming and junk I do, give me a little extra space for junk and overall work out great for my application and needs. I am going to place my order soon and will report about it and maybe even post a synthetic score once I get it up and running.

:toast:

EDIT: Ordered from Chiefvalue.com (= Newegg), they had the same exact price, same shipping, even had my Newegg login info lol! Good stuff, and I got a =$5 coupon, so $104.99 for the WD Caviar SE16 640GB shipped. Good stuff. It'll be my first foray out of using Seagate or Maxtor, and I'm hoping it's worth it. :rockout:

[Kursah]

UPDATE

Just got the drive today, got it formatted, partitioned, just copied all my Seagate's stuff over including OS using Seagate's Discwizard (uses Acronis), no issues, booted up first try...and I noticed a speed difference during that event and everything since. I went from 5.3 to 5.9 in Vista's Score for HDD, making my system average 5.9 (well all my scores are now 5.9)...HD Tach said I was running at 93.5 MB/s Average, which is approx +41MB/s AVG over my Seagate 7200.9. I do gotta say my system feels quite a bit snappier...I'm very impressed with this drive, extremely glad I decided to go with it.

:toast: