Hardware Analysis Community Forums http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/ 2009-11-24T22:59:48-05:00 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/ /images/halogo.gif text/html 2005-08-10T06:25:04-05:00 guru Shane http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=40#310292 I have heard that the Raptors get pretty hot. Can anything else be used along with the fans to help cool them off? text/html 2005-08-10T05:58:06-05:00 Xris http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=40#310289 I wouldn't call the performance parallel. The raptors are about 33% faster than other SATA hard drives, and in raid 0 it's nearly 50% faster. That's a pretty nice jump in performance. Personally I might actually wait for SATA II Raptors to come out before I buy them. I'd rather have 2x Raptors in a Raid 0 and 2x 250GB HDDs Raid 0 than any other combination out there today... You get space and speed. text/html 2005-08-09T17:45:16-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=40#310014 &gt;&gt; That's a lot of money and too expensive for my taste.<br /> <br /> Mine too but if you want *the best*, it is the only way to go.<br /> <br /> In my book, the best drives offer a lot of storage space, good transfer rates, and all for a decent price. Raptors, although they are fast, lack in the area people buy hard drives for: storage. For cheaper ($60 ea.), you can get 3 times as much storage (250 GB vs 75 GB) with just a slight performance loss. I'd rather have 750 GB of storage rather than just 150 GB especially when you consider it is about paralleled in performance.<br /> <br /> 2 x 74 GB Western Digital Raptor (SATA150), $183 = $366 &amp; 148 GB<br /> 3 x 250 GB Hitatchi Deskstar (SATA150), $110 = $330 &amp; 750 GB text/html 2005-08-09T17:21:44-05:00 Jopaus http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=40#309995 To sean,<br /> <br /> They unveiled the UGM on August 5, but throughout the whole week they were showcasing the parts that they had chosen. text/html 2005-08-09T16:29:14-05:00 guru Shane http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=40#309978 I was looking at the prices. They certainly aren't justified in terms of performance, unless you buy a $600 controller and get at least a few drives. That's a lot of money and too expensive for my taste. text/html 2005-08-09T14:11:59-05:00 Sean Costello http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=40#309942 when was that episode on??? text/html 2005-08-09T13:56:21-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=40#309936 The really good SCSI (lots of storage) drives cost over $400 on top of the $250+ SCSI controller. It gets pricy really fast so if you are on a realatively tight budget, go with SATA in RAID. text/html 2005-08-09T05:51:50-05:00 guru Shane http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309825 I am actually glad that this subject was brought up. Since the SCSI drives and the Raptors are about the same price, I might go with the SCSI drives instead. Is there any reason why I shouldn't go with SCSI? I'm not worried about the price of the controller.<br /> <br /> Ok, wow, I guess I was wrong. The controller is over $100. Can anyone tell me why it would be worth it to buy 1 SCSI drive instead of 2 Raptors?? text/html 2005-08-09T04:56:18-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309815 Funny, on the two benchmarks performed on that site, the Raptor didn't win a single one except price. The one that stood out the most to me was CPU Utilization. The SCSI drive uses 4.6% less CPU usage. When you consider what else is going on when a hard drive is in use, that could make a huge difference in overall performance. text/html 2005-08-09T03:54:07-05:00 guru Shane http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309804 <a class="ext" href="/action/r/http://www.gamepc.com/labs/print_content.asp?id=x15vs740gd" target="_blank">http://www.gamepc.com/labs/print_content.asp?id=x15vs740gd</a><br /> <br /> Here's a comparison between SCSI and Raptors.<br /> <br /> Just to save you the trouble of continuous guessing, I'll just tell you. I'm a broke college student with kids that intends on becoming a well-known computer genius with knowledge of all hardware (hands on knowledge), software, current technologies, and next generation technologies. I am not rich. This is my hobby and my career all wrapped up into 1 tiny package, and thus what I spend my money on, other than all of the bills. Just because most people have other hobbies or a low-paying job, does not mean that they couldn't spend this much on a computer if they put their minds to it. <img src="/images/smilies/smile1.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=":)" title=":)"> text/html 2005-08-09T03:35:17-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309801 Those who spent $3000+ are those with a serious need for speed (bragging rights), obviously. They don't have a hole in their wallet and are looking to make one. <img src="/images/smilies/smile4.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=";)" title=";)"> text/html 2005-08-09T03:28:15-05:00 guru Shane http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309800 Keep guessing. You haven't described me yet. text/html 2005-08-09T03:18:28-05:00 kbird5000 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309793 Anyone who would spend over about $2500 for a pc either lives with their parents and has no responsibilities, is rather wealthy and gives none to charity, or hasnt had a run of bad luck with no savings account...lol text/html 2005-08-09T03:12:00-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309789 Not the best. SCSI steals all the marbles for storage performance. It takes four Raptors in RAID 0 to even get close to the performance of a single, good SCSI drive. If you want the best in storage (money out of the picture), SCSI is the *only* way to go.<br /> <br /> Performance wise, our 486 (66 MHz) Intel machine that packed a 1.5 GB SCSI HDD w/ SCSI controller outperformed pretty much everything for several years. The HDD performance alone made it seem several times faster compared to say even 300 MHz machines of the day. text/html 2005-08-09T03:09:03-05:00 Xris http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/47306/?o=20#309787 I already thought of what I'd put in the box if I had to build it today:<br /> <br /> A64 FX57 @3.4Ghz minimum w/ Mach II<br /> DFI SLI-DR mobo<br /> 1GB mushkin redline PC4000 2-2-2-6 1T 3.5v<br /> 2x BFG 7800GTXs @ 550/1.5Ghz Custom water Cooled<br /> 2x 74GB Raptors Raid 0<br /> Thermaltake Shark Case<br /> OCZ 600w PSU<br /> 16x DL DVDRW<br /> <br /> That would eat them for lunch. w/o the mach II it's only like $3500... alot of people would say that's alot, but you have to realize it's the BEST computer you can build right now.