Page 1 of 1
what hdd to buy? 7200 or 10000rpm
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:56 pm
by Tsakali_
this is not really a T&T thread it's more of a preference research.
I need to get a new hardrive I am running out of space, but I figured why just get more space, why not just spend a little more and get a faster hard drive and install the OS on it.
anyone running on a 10000rpm hdd? is the performance worth the price or should I go get a huge 7200rpm instead and never run out of space ever again =P?
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:01 pm
by SoM
seagate 750gig
Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:08 pm
by Kills On Site
I have the WD Raptor 74 GB and I love it completely. Loading things like Trillian, Photoshop and game maps are so much faster compared to a 7,200 RPM. If you can do it, I would have a Raptor with your OS and programs and then a secondary hard drive with bigger things like ISOs, movies, pictures, music etc. If you listen to music on your computer a lot then I might put it on the Raptor. At any rate, 10,000 RPM drives give real world performance increases in areas they should, so it is not a gimmick or a hypothetical improvement.
Also, it all depends on how you are running out of space, is it junk that should be cleaned, or necessary files and things you don't want to get rid of.
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:28 am
by Tsakali_
I have realized that I'm not too good of an organizer I always seem to misplace cd's/dvd's so I'd rather keep everything on a hardrive
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:31 am
by SoM
but hard drives die, how r u gonna keep stuff when it no longer exists
in that case go buy a blu ray
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:30 pm
by Tsakali_
I'm too cheap to buy blue ray right now
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:34 pm
by Tormentius
Tsakali_ wrote:I'm too cheap to buy blue ray right now
Waiting on one of the two formats to win out is a better idea anyways.
Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:51 pm
by Foo
a raid array would meet your needs.
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:57 am
by Grudge
All of those results sound very impressive but in the balance of our application and game tests we only noticed a 2%~3% performance difference between RAID 0 and single drive configurations. Unless you extract files, copy or move them on the same drive, and encode all day long then the benefits of RAID 0 on the typical consumer desktop is not worth the price of admission. What is the price? In this case, $399 for a second 7K1000, a halving of the mean time between failure rates on each drive, a data backup nightmare, and increases in noise, thermals, and power consumption.
RAID 0 can provide some impressive performance results in synthetic benchmarks and certain applications that are write speed starved as we have shown. In fact, with the new test bed the test results where RAID 0 shines are even more impressive now. However, we still do not think RAID 0 is worth the trouble or cost for the average desktop user or gamer, especially with the software RAID capabilities included on most motherboards.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdo ... i=2974&p=1
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 10:45 pm
by bitWISE
I'm running two 74gb raptors in RAID0 and a standard 150gb raptor. The drive and overall system performance increase compared to an IDE or basic sata system is definitely noticeable.
Cost me around $500 for 225gb but wtf I love it.
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 10:59 pm
by Foo
Grudge wrote:http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2974&p=1
I have the chance to perform real-world testing of before and after effects of enabling and disabling 2-disk RAID 0 on my nforce board.
Windows load went from 44 seconds to 32
Quake level load cut about 30%
UT2004 level load cut 20%
I did cave to the benchmarking lust and played with HD-Tach for a while also, that reported lab-condition gains of about 40% over a single disk setup, which after overheads seems about right.
Given the price and complexity of setting up a raid rig (i.e. little and little) I can't see a good argument against it. Coupled with a generous pile of RAM the effects are noticeable. So long as you aren't one of the muffins who doesn't really understand how it works and expect to get more FPS in games after implementing it...
BTW Personally I don't find the raptors appealing as you'll grab the same performance from a quad-disc SATA setup as you would from a pair of Raptors in RAID-0 and the former will be the same price if not cheaper.