10k Drives

[ApaThy_NeXT2]

Is there any reason that only WD makes these? Do they have some kind of special Patent? When do you think other people will get in the game and help bring out bigger and cheaper drives

 

[AMD_RULES]

Assuming you're referring the the WD Raptors, the reason is probably because some of the larger capacity hdds, such as Seagate 750GB and 1TB Hdds (although they spin at 7,200 RPM), have much faster speeds than the Raptors.

 

[ApaThy_NeXT2]

Yes Raptors, and Really??

 

[Dan_D]

Assuming you're referring the the WD Raptors, the reason is probably because some of the larger capacity hdds, such as Seagate 750GB and 1TB Hdds (although they spin at 7,200 RPM), have much faster speeds than the Raptors.

No they don't. The Raptor is still the overall performance winner as far as I know. At least in specific situations anyway. Additionally the Raptor is a niche product. Only enthusiasts really use them. You only see them in lower end enterprise class type environments as well. Seagate and others may not feel that their development and sales are worth while because few people would ever buy them.

 

[EnderW]

Assuming you're referring the the WD Raptors, the reason is probably because some of the larger capacity hdds, such as Seagate 750GB and 1TB Hdds (although they spin at 7,200 RPM), have much faster speeds than the Raptors.

Wrong. The larger drives may have higher maximum transfer rates, but that's not a measurement of performance. The ADFD Raptors are still the fastest drives for single user systems, period.
http://www.storagereview.com/php/be...&devID_0=309&devID_1=348&devID_2=354&devCnt=3
http://www.storagereview.com/ST3750640NS.sr?page=0,1

That said, the Hitachi 7K1000 1TB is within about 10% of the WD1500ADFD performance wise and worth considering if you need the storage space. It's much less expensive on a $/GB perspective compared to the Raptor ($0.27/GB vs $1.13/GB), although more expensive overall ($272 vs $170).

No they don't. The Raptor is still the overall performance winner as far as I know. At least in specific situations anyway. Additionally the Raptor is a niche product. Only enthusiasts really use them. You only see them in lower end enterprise class type environments as well. Seagate and others may not feel that their development and sales are worth while because few people would ever buy them.

Plus the fact that Seagate would be competing against their own SCSI and SAS products which isn't something Western Digital has to worry about as they don't make SCSI or SAS drives.

 

[Rob Black]

They should make a 300GB Raptor

 

[EnderW]

They should make a 300GB Raptor

No they shouldn't. If you want speed + storage space, get the 7K1000 or a 74/150GB Raptor plus some cheap 750GB drives. Do you need more than 150GB for programs?
They should make a faster 74GB one though.

 

[Rob Black]

No they shouldn't. If you want speed + storage space, get the 7K1000 or a 74/150GB Raptor plus some cheap 750GB drives. Do you need more than 150GB for programs?
They should make a faster 74GB one though.

I was thinking 3 of them in Raid 0 for HD Video capture. I know I could get by with 2- 3 500GB 7200.11 drives in Raid 0

 

[EnderW]

I was thinking 3 of them in Raid 0 for HD Video capture. I know I could get by with 2- 3 500GB 7200.11 drives in Raid 0

Doesn't video capture benefit from high transfer rates more than anything else?

 

[Dan_D]

Doesn't video capture benefit from high transfer rates more than anything else?

Yes it does, but aside from that the transfer rates need to be consistent. SATA/SATA II/300/3G's maximum transfer rate is a burst rate. In all the testing I've seen these burst rates are all over the place and still rarely go higher than the Raptors maximum 150MB/sec. transfer rate. Typically though the Raptors actual sustained transfer rate is usually more constant than many other drives. This makes them one of the cheapest of the ideal drives for video editing around. SAS or SCSI drives can be better, but those typically have a higher cost per gigabyte than the Raptors do.

 

[EnderW]

Yes it does, but aside from that the transfer rates need to be consistent. SATA/SATA II/300/3G's maximum transfer rate is a burst rate. In all the testing I've seen these burst rates are all over the place and still rarely go higher than the Raptors maximum 150MB/sec. transfer rate. Typically though the Raptors actual sustained transfer rate is usually more constant than many other drives. This makes them one of the cheapest of the ideal drives for video editing around. SAS or SCSI drives can be better, but those typically have a higher cost per gigabyte than the Raptors do.

I know the burst rate isn't important, but I thought the sustained rate was pretty similar as seen from AnandTech's benchmarks of the WD7400ADFD and Hitchi 7K1000.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2922&p=4
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2949&p=4

 

[Grentz]

Plus the fact that Seagate would be competing against their own SCSI and SAS products which isn't something Western Digital has to worry about as they don't make SCSI or SAS drives.

Thats probably the main reason Seagate does not make a 10k SATA drive. No reason for them to shoot themselves in their own foot for a small enthusiast market.

They should make a faster 74GB one though.

The reason the 150gb is faster is because you work on the outside of the platters more because there is more space. The further out you are on the platter the faster the rotational speed and thus the faster the access.

 

[gjvrieze]

Doesn't video capture benefit from high transfer rates more than anything else?

I do a ton of video editing and have found that 2-4 Raptors in RAID 0 is the best, it just flies and cuts down on human interaction time