WTH, New 150GB Raptor only SATA I???

Necrosis · Jan 6, 2006, 06:23 AM

Why isn't the new Raptor SATA II???

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136012

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=190

I was thinking about picking one up, not now though.

mkk · Jan 6, 2006, 07:39 AM

It still won't be limited by the SATA-150 interface, and it has a window instead.

I'd guess that WD hasn't quite come to terms with NCQ (SATA-2 feature) yet, but NCQ still seems to do so little to todays desktop harddrives anyway so it's not much of a loss. I haven't seen any benchmarks of the drive yet but wouldn't buy it because of the price.

Necrosis · Jan 6, 2006, 07:47 AM

Yes it has a few more features but all it is the 74 plus 8 meg more cache. Whoopee freaking do.

PangingJr · Jan 6, 2006, 08:28 AM

it probably cannot meet the SATA II (SATA 300MB/s) specs for some reason which's i don't know.
it does not have to be SATA II anyway. the Raptor beats the rest of SATA I and SATA II drives that are made for today desktop PCs in hard disk drive performance of most respects. and this because of its 10k RPM in most part and how it manages of its in-built memory.

Necrosis · Jan 6, 2006, 08:42 AM

Yeah but it still would be nice to have the extra boost the SATA II would have.

Sandok · Jan 6, 2006, 10:54 AM

Hehe window raptors

Necrosis · Jan 6, 2006, 10:59 AM

Yes, but you pay $50 more for that window.

Sandok · Jan 6, 2006, 11:08 AM

yup i know...

Plastic is becoming expensive ain't it?

bug77 · Jan 6, 2006, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necrosis

Yeah but it still would be nice to have the extra boost the SATA II would have.

What extra boost?

Necrosis · Jan 6, 2006, 09:12 PM

Higher bandwidth

HawgsHead · Jan 7, 2006, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necrosis

Why isn't the new Raptor SATA II???

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136012

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=190

I was thinking about picking one up, not now though.

Sign me up fer 4 ovem!

mike2h · Jan 7, 2006, 11:24 PM

there is no hd that can use the bandwidth of sata2. in fact there is no hd that make full use of the bandwidth available to sata1. it is very similar to ata 100/133 thing. you still can not find a hd that actually makes full use of the ata 100 let alone ata133.
it is also a lot more than the 74 + 8meg cache. it has higher density platters for a start, & different electronics.
as far as ncq goes, who cares? unles you are running a server, ncq is of no use whatsoever( unless you are running a maxtor maxline3). in some cases it can even degrade single user performance.
this being said, i would not buy the 'x' vers of the drive. i also would not buy either vers right now, but wait a 3- 4 months for price drop & 2-3 rd gen of the drive. wd is constantly improving these drives as is is proved by the incrase in spedd/reliability of later vers of later vers of the 36 vers & increased performance of the newer ver(s) of the 74 series.

HawgsHead · Jan 8, 2006, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike2h

there is no hd that can use the bandwidth of sata2. in fact there is no hd that make full use of the bandwidth available to sata1. it is very similar to ata 100/133 thing. you still can not find a hd that actually makes full use of the ata 100 let alone ata133.
it is also a lot more than the 74 + 8meg cache. it has higher density platters for a start, & different electronics.
as far as ncq goes, who cares? unles you are running a server, ncq is of no use whatsoever( unless you are running a maxtor maxline3). in some cases it can even degrade single user performance.
this being said, i would not buy the 'x' vers of the drive. i also would not buy either vers right now, but wait a 3- 4 months for price drop & 2-3 rd gen of the drive. wd is constantly improving these drives as is is proved by the incrase in spedd/reliability of later vers of later vers of the 36 vers & increased performance of the newer ver(s) of the 74 series.

But it looks SO nice in youre sig!....HA!....Just kidden'.It will be a while before my wife lets me spend any more $$$ on computer equipment....But that '68 Z28 I have my eye on....Hmmmmmmmm.She doesnt mind the cars.....they appreciate in value.

Necrosis · Jan 8, 2006, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike2h

there is no hd that can use the bandwidth of sata2. in fact there is no hd that make full use of the bandwidth available to sata1. it is very similar to ata 100/133 thing. you still can not find a hd that actually makes full use of the ata 100 let alone ata133.
it is also a lot more than the 74 + 8meg cache. it has higher density platters for a start, & different electronics.
as far as ncq goes, who cares? unles you are running a server, ncq is of no use whatsoever( unless you are running a maxtor maxline3). in some cases it can even degrade single user performance.
this being said, i would not buy the 'x' vers of the drive. i also would not buy either vers right now, but wait a 3- 4 months for price drop & 2-3 rd gen of the drive. wd is constantly improving these drives as is is proved by the incrase in spedd/reliability of later vers of later vers of the 36 vers & increased performance of the newer ver(s) of the 74 series.

I know but it's the thought that counts. I want all the goodies!!

mike2h · Jan 8, 2006, 03:14 AM

both of you!

Necrosis · Jan 8, 2006, 09:13 AM

Come on man if you pay $300 for a drive it should have the latest technology.

mike2h · Jan 8, 2006, 09:29 AM

the only thing it does not have is a meaningless title - sata 2. i also would not pay $300 for it.
other than that it is faster than every other sata drive, as fast /faster than all scsi 10,000 rpm drives, & can compete with some 15,000 rpm scsi drives. not sure what else you could want. hmmm.. maybe you should not answer that

Necrosis · Jan 8, 2006, 10:44 AM

Just read this..

http://www.storagereview.com/article...500ADFD_1.html

Now wouldn't you be pissed if you dropped 3 clams on this, and bam they came out with a SATA II version? The point is to get as much out of the drive as possible.

mike2h · Jan 8, 2006, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necrosis

Just read this..

http://www.storagereview.com/article...500ADFD_1.html

Now wouldn't you be pissed if you dropped 3 clams on this, and bam they came out with a SATA II version? The point is to get as much out of the drive as possible.

not if it did not matter. they also say that nobody comes close to meeting either standard either.
saying a drive is sata2 gives it absolutley no performance gain over a sata1 drive. & wont for some time to come.
&, as i have stated twice. i would not pay$300 for it. once it gets down to mid/low $200s i will probaly get one. & of course they will be on rev 2-3 by then so there will probaly be some increased performance as well.

HawgsHead · Jan 9, 2006, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necrosis

Come on man if you pay $300 for a drive it should have the latest technology.

Good point!

mike2h · Jan 9, 2006, 09:23 PM

not if the 'latest tech' is meaningless. & for those of you who have to have someting that says it has the latest everything, wd said that they would implement sata2 as soon as it becomes viable.

PangingJr · Jan 10, 2006, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike2h

not if it did not matter. they also say that nobody comes close to meeting either standard either.
saying a drive is sata2 gives it absolutley no performance gain over a sata1 drive. & wont for some time to come.

i can't say that i feel no different between the two drives. i seem to feel the different likes when copy files from a network drive to my SATA 300MB/s drive it takes less time than the 150MB/s ones, the operation system is also seem to run better. if i said i can notice it you probably won't believe me.

mike2h · Jan 10, 2006, 07:19 PM

you probably are noticing a difference. but it would be due to newer tech in the drive itself - higher density discs, bigger buffer, improved/optimised firmware, etc.

PangingJr · Jan 10, 2006, 07:55 PM

i think any hard drive that is called or marketed by the maker as SATA II must be newer model, and in these SATA II drive itselt should come with newer tech. i think you will agree with me on this. No?
so in my case, saying a drive is SATA II gives it absolutley some performance gain and this may be because whatever newer tech that comes with the drive.
i really don't know what makes it run better. so you probably right about the newer tech...

Necrosis · Jan 10, 2006, 10:46 PM

I can add to this even more. My Samsung drive is SATA 300. It is faster than Seagate 150 drive which is from 2003. However, I had another Seagate at one time same model just newer, and the Samsung was faster than that drive.

mike2h · Jan 10, 2006, 11:54 PM

not sure why you guys keep thinking that sata 2 makes a drive faster than sata1. it is just not the case. if you took 2 identetical drives & built one with sata1 & one with sata2 yhey would perform identically. period.

Jan 6, 2006, 06:23 AM	#1
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	WTH, New 150GB Raptor only SATA I??? Why isn't the new Raptor SATA II??? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136012 http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=190 I was thinking about picking one up, not now though.

Jan 7, 2006, 11:24 PM	#12
mike2h DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: norcal Posts: 6,483 Rep Power: 91 System Specs	there is no hd that can use the bandwidth of sata2. in fact there is no hd that make full use of the bandwidth available to sata1. it is very similar to ata 100/133 thing. you still can not find a hd that actually makes full use of the ata 100 let alone ata133. it is also a lot more than the 74 + 8meg cache. it has higher density platters for a start, & different electronics. as far as ncq goes, who cares? unles you are running a server, ncq is of no use whatsoever( unless you are running a maxtor maxline3). in some cases it can even degrade single user performance. this being said, i would not buy the 'x' vers of the drive. i also would not buy either vers right now, but wait a 3- 4 months for price drop & 2-3 rd gen of the drive. wd is constantly improving these drives as is is proved by the incrase in spedd/reliability of later vers of later vers of the 36 vers & increased performance of the newer ver(s) of the 74 series. __________________

Jan 8, 2006, 03:14 AM	#15
mike2h DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: norcal Posts: 6,483 Rep Power: 91 System Specs	both of you! __________________

Jan 8, 2006, 09:29 AM	#17
mike2h DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: norcal Posts: 6,483 Rep Power: 91 System Specs	the only thing it does not have is a meaningless title - sata 2. i also would not pay $300 for it. other than that it is faster than every other sata drive, as fast /faster than all scsi 10,000 rpm drives, & can compete with some 15,000 rpm scsi drives. not sure what else you could want. hmmm.. maybe you should not answer that __________________

Jan 9, 2006, 09:23 PM	#21
mike2h DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: norcal Posts: 6,483 Rep Power: 91 System Specs	not if the 'latest tech' is meaningless. & for those of you who have to have someting that says it has the latest everything, wd said that they would implement sata2 as soon as it becomes viable. __________________

Jan 6, 2006, 07:39 AM	#2
mkk Cthulhu/Dagon 2012 Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Gefle, Sweden Posts: 4,490 Rep Power: 132 System Specs	It still won't be limited by the SATA-150 interface, and it has a window instead. I'd guess that WD hasn't quite come to terms with NCQ (SATA-2 feature) yet, but NCQ still seems to do so little to todays desktop harddrives anyway so it's not much of a loss. I haven't seen any benchmarks of the drive yet but wouldn't buy it because of the price.

Jan 6, 2006, 07:47 AM	Thread Starter #3
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	Yes it has a few more features but all it is the 74 plus 8 meg more cache. Whoopee freaking do.

Jan 6, 2006, 08:28 AM	#4
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	it probably cannot meet the SATA II (SATA 300MB/s) specs for some reason which's i don't know. it does not have to be SATA II anyway. the Raptor beats the rest of SATA I and SATA II drives that are made for today desktop PCs in hard disk drive performance of most respects. and this because of its 10k RPM in most part and how it manages of its in-built memory.

Jan 6, 2006, 08:42 AM	Thread Starter #5
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	Yeah but it still would be nice to have the extra boost the SATA II would have.

Jan 6, 2006, 10:54 AM	#6
Sandok DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 9,472 Rep Power: 0	Hehe window raptors

Jan 6, 2006, 10:59 AM	Thread Starter #7
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	Yes, but you pay $50 more for that window.

Jan 6, 2006, 11:08 AM	#8
Sandok DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 9,472 Rep Power: 0	yup i know... Plastic is becoming expensive ain't it?

Jan 6, 2006, 09:12 PM	Thread Starter #10
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	Higher bandwidth

Jan 8, 2006, 09:13 AM	Thread Starter #16
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	Come on man if you pay $300 for a drive it should have the latest technology.

Jan 8, 2006, 10:44 AM	Thread Starter #18
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	Just read this.. http://www.storagereview.com/article...500ADFD_1.html Now wouldn't you be pissed if you dropped 3 clams on this, and bam they came out with a SATA II version? The point is to get as much out of the drive as possible.

Jan 10, 2006, 07:19 PM	#23
mike2h DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: norcal Posts: 6,483 Rep Power: 91 System Specs	you probably are noticing a difference. but it would be due to newer tech in the drive itself - higher density discs, bigger buffer, improved/optimised firmware, etc. __________________

Jan 10, 2006, 07:55 PM	#24
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	i think any hard drive that is called or marketed by the maker as SATA II must be newer model, and in these SATA II drive itselt should come with newer tech. i think you will agree with me on this. No? so in my case, saying a drive is SATA II gives it absolutley some performance gain and this may be because whatever newer tech that comes with the drive. i really don't know what makes it run better. so you probably right about the newer tech...

Jan 10, 2006, 10:46 PM	Thread Starter #25
Necrosis HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 8,838 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	I can add to this even more. My Samsung drive is SATA 300. It is faster than Seagate 150 drive which is from 2003. However, I had another Seagate at one time same model just newer, and the Samsung was faster than that drive.

Jan 10, 2006, 11:54 PM	#26
mike2h DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: norcal Posts: 6,483 Rep Power: 91 System Specs	not sure why you guys keep thinking that sata 2 makes a drive faster than sata1. it is just not the case. if you took 2 identetical drives & built one with sata1 & one with sata2 yhey would perform identically. period. __________________