Home Benchmarks: 74GB Raptor vs 150GB Raptor

[Oversized Rooster]

Hey guys, I was operating a 74GB Western Digital Raptor 10000rpm SATA 16MB Cache hard drive as my system HD for a while now.

But I got ahold of the 150GB version now because the 74GB was too small. Believe it or not there is SIGNIFICANT difference in performance between the two.

On paper, they have the same seek times, etc, however in real-world usage the 150GB is a superior drive. Here are some home benchmarks I performed:















As you can see, the 150GB Raptor is MUCH faster in certain applications. I think this is due to its two internal platters as opposed to one on the 74GB. However, the seeking noise is certainly louder on the 150GB model. Even when copying a file FROM the Raptors to a WD5000AAKS, the 150GB sustains a rate despite the destination being slower.

Finally, here are some HD Tune 2.55 graphs. Here, the HDs appears identical.





Don't mind the temperatures. At the time of testing, the 150GB Raptor was sitting flat on the floor outside of the case (thus it's hot) while the 74GB Raptor was inside the case with a fan blowing on it. Under normal conditions, the 74GB Raptor is around 27-28 degrees Celsius and the 150GB is around 30-32.

[Eagle Eye]

Ah Raptors back in the day on my old AthlonXP Rig I had 2 Raptor 36GB and man were they fast but very expensive. I ran that setup in Raid 0 and those puppies just chewed through anything especially a WindowsXP setup no word of lie it would take a mere 15mins to install and be at the activation sequence.
I would consider going back if I could get my hands on 2 cheap 150GB drives unfortunately I went bigger cache and SATA 2 with my Maxtor DiamondMAX drives and mainly price per gigabyte.

Nice to see these drives are still flying,

EE

[magictorch]

Oh no-ive got a 74gb raptor

Good contrast BTW

[Oversized Rooster]

Originally Posted by magictorch

Oh no-ive got a 74gb raptor

Good contrast BTW

Don't worry - the 74GB Raptor still has far superior performance as compared to a 7200rpm drive. Check out the specs for this typical 500GB Western Digital WD5000AAKS. The 74GB Raptor clearly does better.

BTW, nice to see another PCP&C Silencer 750W owner. I don't get why everyone keeps on buying these Corsair PSUs when this one is even better, and delivers 60A for $150...

[Eagle Eye]

I guess I honestly thought SATA2, NCQ and a huge 16mb cache x2 would be pretty fast I have 2 in Raid 0 still pretty quick but not as quick as those raptors from what I remember.

I am an Antec nut I swear by them I think Antec has done an excellent job with their products you name it PSU, Cases and fans as you can see in my sig its all antec.

My Results of HD Tune Benchmark for read based on a Striped Raid 0 array

[CanadaRox]

I'd love to have RAID0 of Raptors in my rig, but the price/GB doesn't seem worth it to me. I've currently got a RAID5 of 3 160GB drives that I've collected and it preforms pretty well. Not nearly as fast as RAID0, but still an improvement over a single drive, plus data security. (ICH9R southbridge).

Here is a screenshot of HDTune

[Digital_fx3]

I will add my 7200.10 16MB 250GB to this for contrast.

[contractk]

Ill play my raptors RAID0 and my seagate barracuda 7200.11 (32mb cache )

[cujo]

my raptor raid 0 followed by my raid 0+1. three of the four 500gb drives are actually ks models (long story) temporarily so these results should increase as i add back the rest of the aaks drives.

[Cptn Vortex]

I'm thinking of doing something..... Maybe 4 x 320gb drives in a RAID 5. Guesses on performance? Also, here is my 2 x 500GB RAID 0 of Hitachi's.

*Edit.... my roommates are streaming Shaun Of The Dead right now as I benched..... gerrrr this is why I need to build my home server already.....