not exactly the same since this is a freakin hard drive!Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Lead Head
ati/nvidia/mobo/etc - driver/bios @ daily basis
even though seagate provided a fix.. still :down: unacceptable!
Printable View
not exactly the same since this is a freakin hard drive!Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Lead Head
ati/nvidia/mobo/etc - driver/bios @ daily basis
even though seagate provided a fix.. still :down: unacceptable!
Thanks for posting this. I need to check mine. I've had mine for 3 months and love it. I use it as storage and have 2 x 320 7200.10 in raid 0 8kb stripeQuote:
Originally Posted by dominick32
And sata2 with 15k spin.Quote:
Originally Posted by aznblueeboi
Although the seagate is a good drive, it just makes me wonder why it took them so long? and the raptor is still considered faster overall. When was the first raptor (5-6 years ago)?, i've had mine for 4 years. Can't stop thinking also why have'nt WD brought out a faster raptor, obvious answer is probably lack of competition.
I think the only credit goes out to WD, "too little too late seagate".
The only thing I think the speed freeks are looking forward to are cheaper SSD's, and with higher read/write speeds.
CPU/GPU/mobo/ram makers have been making leaps and bounds the last few years whilst the storage makers have been mostly static "time for them to wake up".
It is not like the harddrive is not useable.Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
Nice! i just picked one up for storage. Thanks for the review :up:
What firmware bs, and what size .11 is testing here.
Thanks
would be nice if they had some lower capacity 7200.11's
I just dont need 750GB right now a 320 or 250 would be fine for my main rig, I have 1TB for storage already
gonna wait on these , hopefully they will put some lower capacity drives out
good soild review dominick32 :up:
thanks for the effort
some interesting tests though im a bit surprised to see the seagate drive losing to the raptor in loading games and even more surprised to see that raid0 isnt really helping
here is some tests i ran a while back comparing a old 74g raptor to a 320g 16m seagate
ultimatedefrag complete\name and stalker set to be sent to outside of drive and the other copy sent to the inside edge
http://s3.photobucket.com/albums/y83...loadtimeud.jpg
74g 8m raptor
outside edge of drive 41s
inside edge of drive 47s
320g 16m segate
outside 33s
inside 45s
id be interested t see some more tests done with the samsung spinpoint f1 3x334g platters
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/...ang/page9.html
what would really be nice is a 10-15k drive with one or two 334g platters
read transfer rates
samsung spinpoint f1 1tb
min 56
av 91
max 118
seagate 7200.ll 1tb
min 51
av 81
max 100
raptor 150g
min 43
av 74
max 86
Nice review,
those are very nice drives indeed and won't cost you almost anything extra than previous gen ones.
Wow thanks for this review! It clears up several points, including RAID 0 7200.11s.
I'm not surprised at all. RAID0 has rarely ever helped game level load times, and almost always favors the drive with quicker access.Quote:
Originally Posted by dasa
Hi, in the article we are testing with a 500GB capacity as you can read in the article.Quote:
Originally Posted by elec999
They have a 500GB model also. That is the model that we have reviewed in the article. This makes an excellent Raid 1 drive.Quote:
Originally Posted by strange|ife
Thank you for your positive feedback, like usual. :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by -Acid-
Thank you very much for your feedback. The problem here with gaming load times is based 100% on random read capability of the drive (random access time and drive latency). That is why even in the Raid 0 setup the Raptor 150 has the edge over all three drive setups. This is due largely to its 10,000 rpm rotational speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by dasa
Also, I will be doing a review on the Samsung spinpoint F1 very soon to compare against this current setup.
if that is the case how did the seagate 7200.10 320g 16m flog a wd740gd raptor in the game load tests i ranQuote:
Originally Posted by dominick32
looking forward to your review of the f1 :up:
Someone for the love of god stick up a link to AD15 as all i can find is AD14 off NICIX which is mega helpfull but not the program we want!!!
Also is AD15 working yet...?
I'm mega pissed as these drivers are not what they are susrpose to be, for the extra £50 i'd rather get a 16gb SSD and have faster booting times to be honest!
Seagate sucks
Great Job there, nice and detailed. 2 of these in Raid 0 would be awesome 217MB/s read :eek:
Burst speed on Intel ICH sata controllers has always been like that for raid arrays.
It's not an incorrect result, iirc it's the dma link speed burst from the ICH.
As did I - installing tonight, will see how it goes. I got the 500GB drive and will be replacing the 3rd Raptor I'm using to boot Vista.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
Usually RAID controllers can use system memory, or their own dedicated memory to act as an "extended" buffer to the harddrives. which is why you can get those high burstsQuote:
Originally Posted by Seraphiel
Pretty pathetic how slow the HDisk technology is moving compared to memory and CPU and video.
I want a 15K, sataII raptor, or bump the seagate to 10K. One or the other.
I do so love my raptors. It freaks me out, the one drive that could make real use of sataII transfer rate doesn't have it. Cough.
So has anyone found the AD15 firmwear i have mailed asking for it had nothing and nowt via google
so when do these HDD's come out?
It's pretty pathetic how the HD is still the slowest bottleneck of the whole computer still. Raid or no raid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Syn.
I've had my .11's for over a month.Quote:
Originally Posted by X.T.R.E.M.E_ICE
How is that pathetic? They've always been slower because they're mechanical... and they're mechanical because we want capacity. If we were content to have 8GB hard drives, we'd probably be using RAM drives right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob94hawk