New WD VelociRaptor HDD to Take HDD Closest to SSD

[TheLaughingMan]

I am not talking a simple 2 drive raid 0 array, if these drives are at a price point to rival SSD's then a 4+ array is more to my tastes and why sata 3 is a must

Still not needed. As he was explaining, your total through put is not based on the SATA channel max, but the SATA total throughput for all channels used. As such, each new SATA lane you add, the more throughput you get.

Example:
1 HDD + 1 SATA2 plug = 300 MB/s max theoretical
2 HDD + 2 SATA2 plug = 600 MB/s max theoretical
3 HDD + 3 SATA2 plug = 900 MB/s max theoretical
4 HDD + 4 SATA2 plug = 1200 MB/s max theoretical
etc. as each HDD will have their own SATA lane to themself

This HDD will never full saturate a SATA 2 lane, so have all the extra throughput from a SATA 3 setup is pointless cause it will never be used.

 

[ACEkombatkiwi]

Still not needed. As he was explaining, your total through put is not based on the SATA channel max, but the SATA total throughput for all channels used. As such, each new SATA lane you add, the more throughput you get.

Example:
1 HDD + 1 SATA2 plug = 300 MB/s max theoretical
2 HDD + 2 SATA2 plug = 600 MB/s max theoretical
3 HDD + 3 SATA2 plug = 900 MB/s max theoretical
4 HDD + 4 SATA2 plug = 1200 MB/s max theoretical
etc. as each HDD will have their own SATA lane to themself

This HDD will never full saturate a SATA 2 lane, so have all the extra throughput from a SATA 3 setup is pointless cause it will never be used.

Thanks i was always under the impression that you are bound by the sata limit of 300mb total not per channel.

 

[TheLaughingMan]

Thanks i was always under the impression that you are bound by the sata limit of 300mb total not per channel.

No prob. common mistake that got carried over from the IDE days when devices shared a connection lane in a master/slave setup.

Good rule of thumb is the water pipe analogy. Every time you add a connection (new SATA wire in this case, going from x4 to x8 on PCIe, etc.) you are adding more 2 way pipes. Going from SATA 2 to SATA 3 you are switching to larger pipes. RAID works by interconnecting the pipes at the receiving station. Each water source still has its own pipe, but overall water flow is increased because the pumping station is using multiple pipes as a water source. SSD's are like getting water from a pumping station instead of a river in the respect that the pumping station will have water already on hand and under pressure. While an HDD is like a river. It has more water and you can funnel it to get pressure, but not as quickly or as high a pressure level the pumping station.

Sorry, for the lesson. I have taught computer basics before and the water and car analogies get used a lot.

 

[WarEagleAU]

170 bucks for a 600GB Velociraptor??? Hell count me in. I see the read speeds as good, but they do not mention the writes speeds or the I/Ops of it...

 

[TheLaughingMan]

170 bucks for a 600GB Velociraptor??? Hell count me in. I see the read speeds as good, but they do not mention the writes speeds or the I/Ops of it...

If it is anything like its older brother, it should have about the same for write speed would be my guess. Say 140ish MB/s sustained writes. Keep in mind this is probably leaked info. since the actually drive specs besides, now, size of the drive offerings have not been officially released.

 

[TAViX]

Need a comparison real fast with the current 300GB VelociRaptor!!!!!!! NOW!!!!!!!!

as cool as this is it really feels like it's time to move over to ssd and stop trying to get the raptor to compete. I mean sure I have several raptors in my home rigs but that's when ssd's were 1k or more for 32-64gb, now you can get s 270read/250 write 128gb for 300$. for me that's plenty for a primary drive and then I'd raid several 2tb drives for storage.

Not to sound like a fanboi, but as far as I know an average SSD doesn't last more than 5 years, while my good ol' 60GB HDD is still kicking for more than 10 years now...

 

[mab1376]

I just bought 2 WD black drives at 6Gb/ps for RAID0, does anyone think one of these will perform better?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136544

 

[Hayder_Master]

thnax WD, im tired from problems of old fashion HDD's , no more Cylinders please

 

[pr0n Inspector]

I would gladly paid for an inherently silent SSD over a noisy hard drive. in fact, I did. X25M FTW!

 

[ACEkombatkiwi]

Toms has a review up of the 600GB http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd6000hlhx-velociraptor-600gb,2600.html

Price of these are steep as well

 

[Perra]

Wow... those prices are insane. No way I'm getting one of these for that kind of money. Intel SSD here I come.

 

[Delta6326]

Dang those are really Pricey ima stick to my WD black for now was really hoping i could get a VelociRaptor. but if i do ever get them is the SATA backwards compatible?

 

[Perra]

Dang those are really Pricey ima stick to my WD black for now was really hoping i could get a VelociRaptor. but if i do ever get them is the SATA backwards compatible?

Yep, it is.

 

[entropy13]

Techreport with a review:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/18712

 

[95Viper]

Still not needed. As he was explaining, your total through put is not based on the SATA channel max, but the SATA total throughput for all channels used. As such, each new SATA lane you add, the more throughput you get.

Example:
1 HDD + 1 SATA2 plug = 300 MB/s max theoretical
2 HDD + 2 SATA2 plug = 600 MB/s max theoretical
3 HDD + 3 SATA2 plug = 900 MB/s max theoretical
4 HDD + 4 SATA2 plug = 1200 MB/s max theoretical
etc. as each HDD will have their own SATA lane to themself

This HDD will never full saturate a SATA 2 lane, so have all the extra throughput from a SATA 3 setup is pointless cause it will never be used.

This was true in the previous SATA versions, but no longer, if the option is implemented in Serial ATA Revision 3.0; the devices will be able to share a host SATA port. How about 4 or 5 drives on a single port.

See, Q4 and A4 here.

 

[Mussels]

This was true in the previous SATA versions, but no longer, if the option is implemented in Serial ATA Revision 3.0; the devices will be able to share a host SATA port. How about 4 or 5 drives on a single port.

See, Q4 and A4 here.

that can be done in sata II with port multipliers anyway. point is - you dont have to, therefore you dont have to share bandwidth.

 

[Kantastic]

Toms has a review up of the 600GB http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd6000hlhx-velociraptor-600gb,2600.html

Price of these are steep as well

Damn, I guess bta was wrong about the 600GB model having the same MSRP as the old 300GB model. <- He was only $30 off though, props to the guy.

 

[Makaveli]

Need a comparison real fast with the current 300GB VelociRaptor!!!!!!! NOW!!!!!!!!



Not to sound like a fanboi, but as far as I know an average SSD doesn't last more than 5 years, while my good ol' 60GB HDD is still kicking for more than 10 years now...

And this statement is based on what fact?

 

[Mussels]

And this statement is based on what fact?

its well known that SSD's have short lifespans, especially as OS drives.

 

[nt300]

And this statement is based on what fact?

its well known that SSD's have short lifespans, especially as OS drives.

How long is the life compare to HDD, I though with TRIM support SSD last very long.

 

[Mussels]

I think if you have TRIM with SSD they will last very long, longer than mechanical drive imo.

hmmm, not sure on outlasting mechanicals, but yes - trim does help a lot.

 

[Trigger911]

Why did they produce it with sata III and not Sata I or II if it does not utilizes the whole bandwidth???

All drive manufactors do that its th zing that gets you to buy to even get close to maxing sata you gotta buy SAS drives like I got.

 

[TAViX]

hmmm, not sure on outlasting mechanicals, but yes - trim does help a lot.

It helps, but the Windows swap file kills the SSD slowly in time...:shadedshu

 

[95Viper]

Need a comparison real fast with the current 300GB VelociRaptor!!!!!!! NOW!!!!!!!!

Here: Benchmarks

that can be done in sata II with port multipliers anyway. point is - you dont have to, therefore you dont have to share bandwidth.

Oh, that is fine, but my point is that; if implemented, you could. And, with the extra bandwidth of SATA 3 it would be feasible: and less likely than SATA 2 that you would saturate the port with 4 or 5 HDDs/SSDs.

 

[erixx]

600 Gb version now available at Alternate.de for 339 €uro plus shipping

http://www.alternate.de/html/themeworld.html?docId=671315&baseId=671316