Velociraptors...I'm confused...

J

jyi786

Supreme [H]ardness
2FA
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
5,850
So I was thinking about getting a Velociraptor drive. Problem is, I'm finding out there are like 54065165106510 different versions out there, some faster than others and what not.

Anyone care to break down for me what different versions there are, and which version I should be getting? Of course, I want the 300GB variant, but I've heard that they are slower than the 80GB variant? Any truth to this?

Thanks!
 
There's other versions of WD "Raptor" line. If you go to new egg and buy the 300GB Velociraptor, then your buying the fastest drive.
 
WD3000GLFS is the only one that is readily available right now. Flecom might have some WD800HLFS left, but there is no warranty from WD on them. 150/300gb BLFS and 74/150/300gb HLFS should be available soon (some sites are already listing them for special/preorder).

As to performance, no one has done tests with comparing them on similar systems. So no one really knows. Flecom did some tests with a 80gb HLFS but specs of the test setup isn't known. TechLarry did some tests with 300gb GLFS on (I believe) a BadAxe2 which has ICH7R. On the surface it may look like the 80gb HLFS is faster, but too many variables are unknown for me to say it's definitive.

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1032728355&postcount=1
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1329602

--

WD3000GLFS - Retail 300gb with heatsink (non-standard connector location), 3.5"

WD3000BLFS - Enterprise 300gb w/o heatsink, 2.5"
WD1500BLFS - Enterprise 150gb w/o heatsink, 2.5"

WD3000HLFS - 300gb with new heatsink (standard connector location), 3.5"
WD1500HLFS - 150gb with new heatsink (standard connector location), 3.5"
WD800HLFS - Only available in Dell's Optiplex 755, 80gb with new heatsink (standard connector location), 3.5"
WD740HLFS - 74gb with new heatsink (standard connector location), 3.5"
 
What does the "standard" and "non-standard" power location mean? Did WD release something that's proprietary that we need to get an adapter for?
 
Igthorn said:
As to performance, no one has done tests with comparing them on similar systems. So no one really knows. Flecom did some tests with a 80gb HLFS but specs of the test setup isn't known.
Click to expand...

I purchased one of Flecom's drives (WD800HLFS) and ran HD Tune 2.55. I will attempt to upload photos (can someone please help on how to post the photo's online) but for now:

motherboard= ABIT IP35-E, windows xp-32 SP3 Fresh Install:

First test HD Tune 2.55 on WD800HLFS:
Minimum: 65.0
Maximum: 120.8
Average: 107.5
Access time: 6.3
Burst Rate: 199.8
CPU Usage: 1.2

Second test HD Tune 2.55 on WD800HLFS:
Minimum: 65.0
Maximum: 120.8
Average: 107.5
Access time: 6.3
Burst Rate: 199.3
CPU Usage: 1.2

Third test HD Tune 2.55 on WD800HLFS:
Minimum: 73.2
Maximum: 120.8
Average: 107.5
Access time: 6.3
Burst Rate: 199.4
CPU Usage: 1.2

As you can see they are no where near Flecom's benches... though they in line with the 300GB VR benches.
 
kinda disappointing to know 80gb vraptor is not as fast as flecom's post.
 
As you can see they are no where near Flecom's benches...
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if NCQ being enabled has anything to do with it?

I just bought one of these from Dell, and my receipt.....

80 GB 10,000 RPM Serial ATA II NCQ Internal Hard Drive for Select Dell Precision WorkStations
Click to expand...

I've played with AHCI and NCQ before and it decreased HD performance.

Hopefully there's a way to turn it off.
 
Hi

Does anyone knows about WD 1600HLFS model, is it possible to buy them from anywhere? I can't find anything about them on the net, google does not find anything, seems weird.

Cheers
 
I'm still waiting for FLECOM to do this test again, or provide more info on the setup he had which pumped out those ridiculously high benchmarks when he owned those 80GB Velociraptors. Would be nice to figure out why they were so damned fast when he owned 'em yet remarkably "normal" when the new owner tried basically the same tests...
 
Joe Average said:
I'm still waiting for FLECOM to do this test again, or provide more info on the setup he had which pumped out those ridiculously high benchmarks when he owned those 80GB Velociraptors. Would be nice to figure out why they were so damned fast when he owned 'em yet remarkably "normal" when the new owner tried basically the same tests...
Click to expand...

It's pretty obvious FLECOM isn't going to give us any information.

I was a purchaser of one of these drives and am satisfied with the drive, but it's pretty obvious the performance charts he disclosed weren't run using normally avaliable consumer hardware/software.

I personally think it was pretty shady and the lack of response from him just confirms my suspicions.
 
spazoid said:
Does anyone have a link to the benchmarks of FLECOM?
Click to expand...

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1332698

Post #19 shows the 300GB Velociraptor against the short-stroked (from the factory) 80GB Velociraptor. Note that the 300GB Velociraptor results shown in that post are directly attributed to tests run by another member here, TechLarry, as FLECOM didn't have a 300GB drive for testing, only his 80GB model pulled from a Dell server.

The little 80GB drive eats that big 300GB for breakfast, and they're supposed to be the same hardware, so... It's been almost 2 months now and no one has been able to match or even come close to those results FLECOM got with the 80GB short-stroked Velociraptor, and I for one would love to know what he's got in that box he used for testing.

Hell, I can't even afford a Velociraptor right now but if that 80GB drive really is or can be that fast, I'd sell off something to get one, but everyone that's acquired the 80GB model (especially OldHippie that bought one directly from FLECOM, apparently) can't even get close to those numbers.

It's just odd, that's all, and some of us wonder how such a possible "fluke" of a test occurred.
 
(especially OldHippie that bought one directly from FLECOM, apparently)
Click to expand...

Let's drop the "apparently" part.

I'm sure he's aware of this thread and would probably cry "foul" if I wasn't a purchaser with first hand knowledge of the situation.

I have the PayPal receipt and will post it if needed.

I don't lie because I've never had a reason to. It just doesn't matter.

Now, if you're my spouse or a member of a law enforcement community, I have been know to tell little "fibs". ;)
 
For the last time. There is little to no difference in performance between any new 2.5" Raptor. Period. Why would there be? Shortstroking aside, the same tech is used in all of them. The differences lie in capacity.
 
heelix said:
The controller card makes a world of difference in performance.

I did some initial benchmarks with the mainboard RAID on my 780i box.

http://heelix.multiply.com/photos/album/22/Hard_Drive_benchmarks

and found it to be sub-par in comparison to a couple other people's benchmarks. Turns out a hardware RAID controller has a big impact on these drives. YMMV.
Click to expand...

very true. get a nice Areca or mtron sata raid controller and you'll see remarkable performance increases.

http://www.nextlevelhardware.com/storage/battleship/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top