PDA

View Full Version : WD to introduce new series Velociraptors HDDs


Pages : [1] 2

bashar-corei7
04-04-10, 01:54 PM
Hi to all.......................
WD is working on a new series Velociraptor HDDs. Looks like WD is increasing capacity towards 450 and 600 GB models. The new Velociraptor will get an extension in their name called VR200M. The platters will be 200 GB each, rotating at 10.000 RPM. Power consumption will roughly be 6.5 Watt and in standby 0.7 Watt.

The new VelociRaptor VR200M promises sustained read speeds of 145MB/s. Seek times will be 3,6 ms during read and 4,2 ms during write. Good news is also that the new HDDs will get a SATA 6-Gbps connector and 32MB cache.

My pc :::intel 920 corei7 3.8GHZ/RAM 6GB 1600 3*2 /MOTHERBOARD GIGABYTE EX58UD4P / VGA CARD GEFORCE LEADTEK GTX285/MONITOR HP PAVILION W2207 / HDD WD 1TB GREEN + WD 500GB BLUE /sound XFI TITANUM /SPEAKER CREATIVE GIGAWORKS G550 /PSU GIGABYTE 1200W / CASE FULL TOWER GIGA BYTE 3D AURURA / SNAZZI VIDEO CAPTURE CARD.WIn 7/64bit Ultimate

CaptNKILL
04-04-10, 02:22 PM
Meh...

The high speed drives have really lost their appeal since SSDs started taking off.

No doubt these will be fast for mechanical drives, but the difference between these and a 7200RPM drive that costs $200 less and holds twice as much data will be practically non-existent compared to what an SSD can offer.

|MaguS|
04-04-10, 02:29 PM
Meh...

The high speed drives have really lost their appeal since SSDs started taking off.

No doubt these will be fast for mechanical drives, but the difference between these and a 7200RPM drive that costs $200 less and holds twice as much data will be practically non-existent compared to what an SSD can offer.

While I agree I rather get one of these then pay the same amount for 1/5th the storage in an SSD.

My biggest gripe is still the cost vs capacity of SSD. I have been thinking about moving over but considering I have 500gb of games installed on my 640gb drive it would be too costly to go SSD. Yes I know I can install games on other drives but doesn't that defeat the purpose of getting a faster drive?

CaptNKILL
04-04-10, 02:41 PM
While I agree I rather get one of these then pay the same amount for 1/5th the storage in an SSD.

My biggest gripe is still the cost vs capacity of SSD. I have been thinking about moving over but considering I have 500gb of games installed on my 640gb drive it would be too costly to go SSD. Yes I know I can install games on other drives but doesn't that defeat the purpose of getting a faster drive?

I don't think games benefit too much from an SSD because they use mostly large files which benefit from high sequential read speeds, not random reading and writing. Sequential speeds aren't that big of a problem right now. You can get a 1Tb drive for $80 that can read at around 100Mb\sec. My 500GB Seagate gets around 105Mb\sec.

All you really need is an SSD large enough to hold your operating system and your most used programs because those are going to be absolutely packed with tiny files reading and writing constantly, which kills mechanical drives.

Go check the benchmarks on most sites. Game level loads may decrease by 2-3 seconds (out of 30) when going from a mechanical drive to an SSD, but the overall quickness of Windows applications increases dramatically.

The ideal setup right now for cost vs. performance is generally going to be an SSD large enough to hold your OS and programs (40-80Gb is plenty for most people) and a 1Tb+ drive for storage and games. The 10k RPM mechanical drives just don't seem to have a place anymore since they're far more expensive than the 7200RPM drives and the only areas they benefit aren't really all that important or are far FAR outclassed by an SSD.

bob saget
04-04-10, 03:16 PM
Just got a WDC Black 1TB SATA 3 drive or my games/Steam drive. To replace the 300GB VRaptor :p

those are quick, i like it :)

musman
04-05-10, 11:17 AM
CaptNKILL is right. I use an Intel 40Gb SSD for my OS and two 7200rpm 500gb Seagate in RAID 0 where I store all my games. The SSD was a large improvement. It completely boots up in 55 seconds. When I was using on Seagate HDD it would take up to 3min (more or less) to boot completely. Your everyday tasks like e-mail, web browser basically anything on the SSD are almost instant. When I had the HDD and Windows would start indexing, creating a restore point...ect It would slow my PC down the HDD light would be flickering away for a while and I would just hald to wait for it to finish, well I no longer have that problem.

I have two videos on youtube showing the difference in boot up time between the HDD and the SSD.

HDD video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjqXxZoTJEc
SSD video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjU6GC_aB4A

I do have a different Windows theme in the videos but I have just about the same programs that load on boot up in both. So it's a fair comparison.

Airbrushkid
04-05-10, 11:57 AM
My system in my sig boots up a lot faster then your hard drive set up.

musman
04-05-10, 01:01 PM
My system in my sig boots up a lot faster then your hard drive set up.

I'm sure it did. How about the SSD boot time?

Redeemed
04-05-10, 03:23 PM
Yeah, I'm all about capacity over speed.

I've been eyeing the WD Black series, especially the 1 and 2TB drives. :)

Maverick123w
04-05-10, 03:41 PM
I personally wouldn't mind having one just for my games. ATM yes ssd's are a waste for anything more than being used as an os drive. With windows on my ssd it really breathed new life into my WD black. Games loaded a good deal quicker (~5sec) than when the black was running the OS.

Redeemed
04-05-10, 04:00 PM
I personally wouldn't mind having one just for my games. ATM yes ssd's are a waste for anything more than being used as an os drive. With windows on my ssd it really breathed new life into my WD black. Games loaded a good deal quicker (~5sec) than when the black was running the OS.

I've often thought of doing this- getting a really large drive to store all my games and documents and such, then just using the SSD for Windows. Games like Oblivion, however, I'd want on the SSD as I'm sure it'd eliminate nearly all stuttering and pausing when loading new areas.

I'm set on the 80-128GB range, can't get one now as I just don't have the spare finances.

Maverick123w
04-05-10, 04:37 PM
I don't never had tons of start up programs running so when my system was operational I had about 16GB free on the SSD which was just fine for me. I'm sure an 80GB would be better for most people, but a 40 was perfect for me.

Airbrushkid
04-07-10, 01:13 PM
I got from the push of the button to start to full desktop. 57.2 seconds.


I'm sure it did. How about the SSD boot time?

Maverick123w
04-07-10, 02:59 PM
I'll have to total mine up again, but the last time I did it it was right around ~40sec I believe.

Peoples-Agent
03-05-11, 06:27 PM
I'm really tempted to pick up one of these now, just as a Steam games drive and nothing else. REALLY tempted.

They are under 200 over here, nearly bought it two seconds ago.

Rakeesh
03-05-11, 07:37 PM
I'm really tempted to pick up one of these now, just as a Steam games drive and nothing else. REALLY tempted.

They are under 200 over here, nearly bought it two seconds ago.

IMO better off getting SSD's. Mechanical drives are just so slow compared to them.

http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/high_end_drives.html

The fastest HDD barely touches the slowest SSD, and the fastest SSD is over twice as fast as the fastest HDD.

Peoples-Agent
03-05-11, 10:40 PM
It's just having the 60GB still, the new larger SSD would become the boot drive and 60GB most likely be stuck in the system somewhere floating about like an abandoned half cousin.

Suppose I could just pull the trigger on a 240GB Vertex 2E but then the Vertex 3 is here this month and the prices will drop.

Rakeesh
03-06-11, 12:15 PM
I use a WDC Black 1TB as my Steam drive. Works good.

Most games cannot profit from the SSD boost.

I get much quicker load times, especially in crysis for example.

|MaguS|
03-06-11, 12:55 PM
I use a WDC Black 1TB as my Steam drive. Works good.

Most games cannot profit from the SSD boost.

L4D sees a boost... as does Civ5.

Logical
03-06-11, 04:02 PM
I still have an older 150gb raptor and although it is still working fine, man is it noisy....The WD 640gb black i have is almost silent in comparison. However because i use the raptor as the OS drive i am tempted to move onto a 120gb SSD to replace it as the noise has gotten unbearable since i mounted my tower on top of my desk.

I would certainly pay the extra for an SSD that would read and write a lot faster than the raptor at silent operation. :)

Peoples-Agent
03-06-11, 06:59 PM
Just dropped over 300 on a Vertex 2E 240GB to be my Steam drive. Why not. lol

Madpistol
03-06-11, 11:45 PM
I personally wouldn't mind having one just for my games. ATM yes ssd's are a waste for anything more than being used as an os drive. With windows on my ssd it really breathed new life into my WD black. Games loaded a good deal quicker (~5sec) than when the black was running the OS.

I agree with this for sure. With an SSD, everything loads faster, and my system is so responsive that it's downright scary. I've never had a computer feel seamless. I grow tired of waiting on my fiance's computer to respond to simple commands. I just don't see how a Velociraptor could even come close to competing with an SSD's instantaneous response time. I mean, it's not the 3.6ms response time that's the problem. It's the 3.6 + 3.6 + 3.6 + 3.6 + 3.6 + 3.6 + etc. response time of sequential seeks and reads of fragmented files that wears on me. Right now, I've got 10 windows and 8 programs running at the same time in windows. The computer is still fully responsive and I can browse through system files, music, videos, etc. as if the system is at idle. My old Core 2 system couldn't even come close to that, and I know that it's not just the Phenom II that's causing this sort of performance. My system was only slightly better at multitasking before December, which is when I made my last upgrade.

It's the SSD. That's what makes the difference. Anyone that won't buy an SSD because of how low their capacity is hasn't experienced the speed of an SSD. It will change your mind on how you experience computers in general.

My SSD in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw2g4bIu03M

XDanger
03-07-11, 06:38 AM
My SSD in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw2g4bIu03M

The icons don't change as fast as I was expecting.

Thread is derailed already so I'm going to ask what SSD's are not much better than HDD's at?

bacon12
03-07-11, 07:41 AM
My raid 0 smokes most single SSDs in everything but access time.

mullet
03-07-11, 11:28 AM
Vortex 3!!!!!!!!!!!!!