What to do with two 37GB Raptors?

2008-01-29 17:06:18

#1

Dauntless: Admin; +2,249|7021|London

I recently aquired two 37 GB Raptors, at first I was going to sell one and keep the other as a boot drive, then I thought "fuck it, I'm just gonna sell them both, how much difference could an extra 2800rpm make?" (on ebay, they're going around £40 each). But then I thought, what if I put them in RAID 0?

Then I thought I should just ask you guys.

Spec:

CPU: Intel Quad Core Q6600
RAM: OCZ 2GB 1000MHz
Mobo:Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R
GPU: ATi X1950XTX

Last edited by Dauntless (2008-01-30 05:16:51)

2008-01-29 17:07:00

#2

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6986|67.222.138.85

RAID 0, put all your games on them, load in half the time.*

_{*dramatization}

2008-01-29 17:08:35

#3

Trigger_Happy_92: Uses the TV missle too much; +394|6929

gimme.

2008-01-29 17:09:06

#4

Aries_37: arrivederci frog; +368|6854|London

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
RAID 0, put all your games on them, load in half the time.

2008-01-29 17:11:19

#5

legionair: back to i-life; +336|6902|EU

What is the difference? No really, I dont get it. I wanted to buy some new HD as well, but I just dont know what is what. So if you dont know what to do with those Raptors- pass them to me

2008-01-29 17:23:33

#6

Dauntless: Admin; +2,249|7021|London

Would I be asking too much to use it as a boot drive for Vista Ultimate? I'm currently on XP but have wanted to make the change recently.

Trigger_Happy_92 wrote:
gimme.

Sure, in exchange for cash, if I decide to sell

2008-01-29 17:52:20

#7

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6986|67.222.138.85

Dauntless wrote:
Would I be asking too much to use it as a boot drive for Vista Ultimate? I'm currently on XP but have wanted to make the change recently.

No, your load time will decrease significantly.

2008-01-29 21:58:44

#8

Defiance: Member; +438|6950

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Dauntless wrote:
Would I be asking too much to use it as a boot drive for Vista Ultimate? I'm currently on XP but have wanted to make the change recently.
No, your load time will decrease significantly.

Maybe your OS, maybe some apps, but for games that's a big bullshit and fuck no.

"Little performance benefits appeared from the RAID 0 array, In some cases
there were some decreases in performance. These startling results prompted an
extended version of tests. Today's games rely more on the CPU in terms of
mission and level loading. That means that alot of time is spent decompressing
and opening levels, textures and sounds that are being read from the hard
disk. To determine just how important the CPU is in loading levels, two
different CPUs were used on a test bed. A 3.2 GHZ Pentium 4 and a 2.0 GHZ
processor. The 2.0 GHZ processor performed 14 seconds slower than the 3.2GHZ
one."
Finally in conclusion, it is possible to conclude that "RAID 0 is an expensive
way to obtain a small performance advantage, but this was always been the
case." A few game level load times are below to prove that RAID is not that
much faster and promising than a simple single parallel drive brought to you
by Maximum PC.
Code:
Drive Type                  RAID | Single Drive
Doom 3 (seconds)              38 | 35
Far Cry (seconds)             21 | 21
Battlefield 1942 (seconds)    22 | 22
Benchmark results brought to you by Maximum PC

Edit: Oh, and if you don't need any more storage space just sell the drives.

Last edited by Defiance (2008-01-29 21:59:29)

2008-01-29 22:27:36

#9

Sup3r_Dr4gon: Boat sig is not there anymore; +214|6606|Australia

Get them both in RAID 0. Raptors are fast, no doubt about it. I timed my single 74GB against my old 160GB drive in BF2 and it gave me some pretty big boosts in loading maps.
As for RAID, my friend used to have a RAID of 2 7200rpm drives, which would be faster then my 74GB in connecting to BF2 servers. His processor and RAM were slower, and we were both connecting through the same internet connection, so it was the only thing I we could put it down to.

Time how fast your current drive can load maps, the put the raptors in RAID and time that. You'll see much shorter times for sure.

2008-01-30 05:16:34

#10

Dauntless: Admin; +2,249|7021|London

Well, all my games load fairly quickly anyway. But I guess it would be nice to boot into windows quicker.

How much faster could I go with a raptor? (for booting into OS)

Spec:

CPU: Intel Quad Core Q6600
RAM: OCZ 2GB 1000MHz
Mobo:Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R
GPU: ATi X1950XTX

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Dauntless wrote:
Would I be asking too much to use it as a boot drive for Vista Ultimate? I'm currently on XP but have wanted to make the change recently.
No, your load time will decrease significantly.

I meant, as it's only 37GB, how much space would I have left for other stuff after Vista was on it?

2008-01-30 05:20:31

#11

elbekko: Your lord and master; +36|6680|Leuven, Belgium

Since alot of games (read: those published by MS, like Gears of War) still feel the need to install to the C: drive, 37GB really isn't that much IMO.
Hell, it wouldn't even fit my music collection.

2008-01-30 05:49:44

#12

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6986|67.222.138.85

Defiance wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Dauntless wrote:
Would I be asking too much to use it as a boot drive for Vista Ultimate? I'm currently on XP but have wanted to make the change recently.
No, your load time will decrease significantly.
Maybe your OS, maybe some apps, but for games that's a big bullshit and fuck no.
"Little performance benefits appeared from the RAID 0 array, In some cases
there were some decreases in performance. These startling results prompted an
extended version of tests. Today's games rely more on the CPU in terms of
mission and level loading. That means that alot of time is spent decompressing
and opening levels, textures and sounds that are being read from the hard
disk. To determine just how important the CPU is in loading levels, two
different CPUs were used on a test bed. A 3.2 GHZ Pentium 4 and a 2.0 GHZ
processor. The 2.0 GHZ processor performed 14 seconds slower than the 3.2GHZ
one."
Finally in conclusion, it is possible to conclude that "RAID 0 is an expensive
way to obtain a small performance advantage, but this was always been the
case." A few game level load times are below to prove that RAID is not that
much faster and promising than a simple single parallel drive brought to you
by Maximum PC.
Code:
Drive Type                  RAID | Single Drive
Doom 3 (seconds)              38 | 35
Far Cry (seconds)             21 | 21
Battlefield 1942 (seconds)    22 | 22
Benchmark results brought to you by Maximum PC
Edit: Oh, and if you don't need any more storage space just sell the drives.

Not on those games. There was a measureable difference in BF2 and Source when I went to a raptor from a 7200 RPM drive.

I believe Vista is about 8-10gb? not sure

2008-01-30 05:52:19

#13

Marlboroman82: Personal philosophy: Clothing optional.; +1,022|6902|Camp XRay

just give them to me

https://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l250/marlboroman82/Untitled-8.png

2008-01-30 06:03:37

#14

Dauntless: Admin; +2,249|7021|London

This was pretty interesting:

http://www.overclockers.com/articles1297/

https://www.overclockers.com/articles1297/pic3.jpg

But I could do with the cash for other stuff. I'm still undecided...

elbekko wrote:
Since alot of games (read: those published by MS, like Gears of War) still feel the need to install to the C: drive, 37GB really isn't that much IMO.
Hell, it wouldn't even fit my music collection.

Yeah, I have a 500GB Hard drive for all my other stuff, But I'm pretty sure most other games let you install on other hard drives right? The only games I'd want to install on the raptor are games I play multiplayer, which is only 2 or 3.

Marlboroman82 wrote:
just give them to me

Just so you can mana burn more quickly?

2008-01-30 06:05:19

#15

Marlboroman82: Personal philosophy: Clothing optional.; +1,022|6902|Camp XRay

yea, when are you going to start playing with us?

2008-01-30 06:07:10

#16

Dauntless: Admin; +2,249|7021|London

NEVER!!1

quit derailing my topic, gtfo and go on xfire.

2008-01-30 06:11:21

#17

Marlboroman82: Personal philosophy: Clothing optional.; +1,022|6902|Camp XRay

Dauntless wrote:
NEVER!!1

quit derailing my topic, gtfo and go on xfire.

i am at work, so go and download the trial so you will be ready to play when I get home.

2008-01-30 06:25:40

#18

']['error: Banned; +630|6923|The Netherlands

Marlboroman82 wrote:
Dauntless wrote:
NEVER!!1

quit derailing my topic, gtfo and go on xfire.
i am at work, so go and download the trial so you will be ready to play when I get home.

wowfag

2008-01-30 11:53:27

#19

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6860|SE London

Sell them. Raptors are a waste of money. No point to them whatsoever. You can get better access times with large, well managed 7200rpm drives than you can from Raptors, for less money. 37GB for a system disk for Vista is a joke, don't do it.

There is absolutely no point whatsoever in buying Raptors. They are a stupid purchase.

2008-01-30 11:55:58

#20

Poseidon: Fudgepack DeQueef; +3,253|6817|Long Island, New York

Bertster7 wrote:
Sell them. Raptors are a waste of money. No point to them whatsoever. You can get better access times with large, well managed 7200rpm drives than you can from Raptors, for less money. 37GB for a system disk for Vista is a joke, don't do it.

There is absolutely no point whatsoever in buying Raptors. They are a stupid purchase.

I have a 150 gb raptor and I beg to differ.

I'm buying another one this summer, but I'm not gonna put 'em in RAID0.

2008-01-30 12:07:18

#21

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6860|SE London

Poseidon wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
Sell them. Raptors are a waste of money. No point to them whatsoever. You can get better access times with large, well managed 7200rpm drives than you can from Raptors, for less money. 37GB for a system disk for Vista is a joke, don't do it.

There is absolutely no point whatsoever in buying Raptors. They are a stupid purchase.
I have a 150 gb raptor and I beg to differ.

I'm buying another one this summer, but I'm not gonna put 'em in RAID0.

You might beg to differ, doesn't make you right....

I currently have several Raptors lying around, amongst my many, many hard drives. They are not as fast as "slower" larger capacity drives. I've tested this at length.

Of course this is based on typical usage scenarios rather than out of the box speeds - a Raptor with only the OS installed on it will obviously run faster than a 7200rpm drive with only the OS on it - but as the drives start to fill up, the Raptors lead drops until it falls way behind. Making good use of partial stroking I've had a few 7200rpm drives that have beaten Raptors quite comfortably.

For the price of a 150GB Raptor you can get a 750GB 7200rpm drive. If both drives have a normal amount of data on, say 80GB, the 750GB drive will have better access times, it's very simple. I've even managed to setup 7200rpm drives in a RAID0 array to have better access times than Raptors (remember RAID has quite a negative impact on access times).

You need to look at real world performance, not benchmarks on empty systems, which are all well and good, but fairly pointless.

2008-01-30 12:23:49

#22

topal63: . . .; +533|6997

^^^ You sir, are correct.

Real world performance, using an app., a game, etc, nothing appreciable happens (with raptors in raid config - 0). The other guy can google the web. There are plenty of tests that demonstrate this.

2008-01-30 14:50:01

#23

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6986|67.222.138.85

Of course if you fill up your drives they'll slow down significantly, but if you keep the same relative percentage raptors will be faster. You aren't looking at the most storage possible if you are buying raptors.

I saw a measurable decrease in BF2 load times going from a 80gb/150gb 7200RPM drive to a 20gb/32gb raptor, both defragmented frequently.

2008-01-30 15:13:06

#24

Poseidon: Fudgepack DeQueef; +3,253|6817|Long Island, New York

Bertster7 wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
Sell them. Raptors are a waste of money. No point to them whatsoever. You can get better access times with large, well managed 7200rpm drives than you can from Raptors, for less money. 37GB for a system disk for Vista is a joke, don't do it.

There is absolutely no point whatsoever in buying Raptors. They are a stupid purchase.
I have a 150 gb raptor and I beg to differ.

I'm buying another one this summer, but I'm not gonna put 'em in RAID0.
You might beg to differ, doesn't make you right....

I currently have several Raptors lying around, amongst my many, many hard drives. They are not as fast as "slower" larger capacity drives. I've tested this at length.

Of course this is based on typical usage scenarios rather than out of the box speeds - a Raptor with only the OS installed on it will obviously run faster than a 7200rpm drive with only the OS on it - but as the drives start to fill up, the Raptors lead drops until it falls way behind. Making good use of partial stroking I've had a few 7200rpm drives that have beaten Raptors quite comfortably.

For the price of a 150GB Raptor you can get a 750GB 7200rpm drive. If both drives have a normal amount of data on, say 80GB, the 750GB drive will have better access times, it's very simple. I've even managed to setup 7200rpm drives in a RAID0 array to have better access times than Raptors (remember RAID has quite a negative impact on access times).

You need to look at real world performance, not benchmarks on empty systems, which are all well and good, but fairly pointless.

I've tested it too, and my loading times SIGNIFICANTLY dropped in games like BF2, CSS, etc. I had a 7200 RPM 250gb Barracuda in my old comouter, and it was definately much, much slower than this Raptor. I couldn't be happier with the speed this thing has - it's incredible.

I only have 35 something gigs of space left on my 150 gig Raptor, and it's still blazingly fast in every game I play.

The benchmarks can say what they want, but with my personal experience, the Raptor is well worth the money. Putting Raptors in RAID0, yes, I agree is stupid because there's no significant performance spike. However - simply having a Raptor and using it is well worth the money.

2008-01-30 15:40:27

#25

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7051|PNW

My RAID0'd Raptors allow me to load Battle for Middle Earth over 1.5x faster than a buddy with a similar rig. With some apps, it's slower. Depends, really.

BF2S Forums What to do with two 37GB Raptors?

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Trigger_Happy_92 wrote:

Dauntless wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Dauntless wrote:

Code:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Dauntless wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Dauntless wrote:

Code:

elbekko wrote:

Marlboroman82 wrote:

Dauntless wrote:

Marlboroman82 wrote:

Dauntless wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Board footer