Can I use a 15,000 rpm cheetah?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Well firstly, you say whether to go 15K SCSI or Raptor, and later you ask about RAID0 Raptor vs SCSI. Are your options RAID0 Raptor or a single SCSI drive, or do you want to know about single drive Raptor performance too? And also "15K SCSI" definitely needs to be better defined, the various 15K SCSI drives perform VERY differently under different workloads.

Anyways, answers to a lot of what you asked can be found here, and on the next page of the review:
http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200601/WD1500ADFD_4.html

As you can see, for single-user scenarios the Raptor is just plain faster a majority of the time. Why? Well because 15K SCSI are built with workstation and server use in mind, and as such a lot of the focus is on seek times. However, in a single-user scenario this is largely negated because the workload is very different. Plus, a HUGE difference comes from the drive firmware, where again the SCSI drives are targetted towards a completely different use. Again you can see this in the review, forgetting the Raptor for a moment look at just how varied the performance of the 15K SCSI drives is - and all this is despite the fact that many of them have very similar read speeds and access times. Another myth you need to forget is that fast reads and writes directly transfer to faster single-user performance. For this you can check out the 15K.5 Cheetah review:
http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200609/ST3300655LW_1.html

As you can see the transfer rates of this drive are truly unparalleled. It's just a monster. However later when you take a look at the single-user benchmarks you'll see that it doesn't do well AT ALL, including against previous-generation drives. On the other hand the one thing I will say that the SCSI drives have going for them is that with prolonged use your OS, pagefile, etc will get more and more fragmented. As that happens, the seek times will start to play a larger role since your drive will have to more and more seeking. I think this might be one of the reasons why some people end up saying that the SCSI drives are faster, or alternatively it's just a psychological effect of "OMG 15000 RPM".

Also you say cost isn't an issue but clearly it should play at least some role. To get a SCSI card and a SCSI drive you'll almost definitely pay more than a single Raptor (this is considering ebay prices, if you buy a SCSI card at an online retailer or whatever it's gonna cost an arm and a leg, or a kidney!). Another point of consideration is whether your data is important to you - RAID0 Raptors will have a considerably higher chance of failure than a single SCSI drive. I've never seen a RAID0 vs single SCSI benchmark for single-user use, and I doubt you'll find one cause it isn't exactly fair, but I'd be willing to bet anything at all that they would crush the SCSI drive (any SCSI drive) completely.

Sorry for how long that got but hopefully it helps you out.
 
Fedor,
Thank you for taking the time to compose that response. It was very comprehensive and thorough indeed.

I should have been more clear in my question. I'm a single user and my use for the speed is a single business application (a trading platform) that RW to a cache on the HD in a real-time. There are muliple data sources that come from the application and the data often comes in raw voluminous bursts that is written to the HD and then read back to the platform so I need something fast that is necessary for trade execution...timing is everything.

The data isn't terribly critical in that a nighly external backup is sufficient.

I think what confuses me is that on one hand multiple sources of data are being RW to the disk...kind of like what SCSI was optimized for but on the other hand I'm a single desktop user and it is only one application that is generating the mulitple sources of data. So, I don't know what hat to be wearing here?

As a consequence, I was considering 2 Raptors in RAID0 in lieu of one SCSI. Based on my information above, and what you have already kindly provided, is it your opinion that the 2 Raptors would still be the way to go?

BTW I run Diskkeeper nighly.

Thank you again.
 
Yes its also a bit hard for me to gauge where you are on the single-user to multi-user spectrum in terms of use. However, from what I've heard [of your usage pattern] I would say that its extremely likely that a RAID0 Raptor setup would be faster than one SCSI drive in your case. Coupled with the backups you mentioned, the nightly defrag, and not needing an extra PCI card and having to deal with bulky SCSI cables and so forth, the Raptors are probably the better bet.

Good luck!
 
There wouldn't really be much point. Remember WD first launched the Raptor hoping that it would win a place in entry-level enterprise applications, but it just didn't perform as well as 10K SCSI drives for enterprise uses, and it was practically by accident that enthusiasts caught on to it and made it the drive we all know today - in part because when it came to single-user the drive performed well. Since then WD has made the firmware better and better for single-user scenarios. Therefore, even a 15K version would clearly be for enthusiasts and not for enterprise use, in which case you have to ask yourself would a faster seek time help performance for single-user environments? And the answer is at BEST a maybe. If you take a look at Anandtech's review of the 1TB Hitachi drive, you'll see that it comes very close performance-wise to the Raptor, and even beats it here and there. And this is at 7200rpm. So it's very possible that the added costs of manufacturing a 15K drive, coupled with the fact that you wouldn't be able to have capacities as large as the 10K drives, makes a potential 15K Raptor not have much point. Of course they might release one anyway, because there are loads of people that will buy it purely because of the "OMG 15K rpm" factor.

As for SATA 600 or 1200, what the heck is the point of that? Drives are only just managing over 100mb/s now (non-burst) so even SATA1 is still good enough for most drives. Plus, SCSI only goes up to 320mb/s whereas the current SATA2 is 300mb/s, so again I don't see what role a SATA 600 or 1200 (wtf really?) would play. Enterprise drives are fast switching to SAS now anyway, which is an extension of SATA that improves performance for multi-user scenarios.
 
You will need:

1) SCSI Adapter (good ones are not cheap)
2) SCSI Cable
3) A terminator
4) A way to spread around how you have a 15k Cheetah and it how bad it pwns!

Look in my sig. I am in the process of shopping for a RAID card and a third 15k Cheetah. I have XP Pro x64 on one and Vista Ultimate x64 on the other.
 
So i was considering buying a new hd and looking at raptors vs. caviars in raid 0 and what-not. So then i popped over to the list of 15,000 SCSI drives and started to wonder what i'd have to do to get one of those running in my system. would it be worth it, would i just have to buy a PCI card or what? Any help/advice would be appreciated. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I recently read an article about the perpendicular recording HDD's compared to WD raptors. it seems that you can build a relatively cheap raid 0 with 2 500GB HDD's and it will kill any 150gb raptor (+ you get 1 TB space!). The performance is close to that of the raptors in raid 0.

Forget the server HDD's like the cheetah, they are not worth it these days. Plus they are expensive and you need an additional controller for them.
 
Are you kidding!? My Cheetahs in a RAID 0 array will blow any other 2 drives away. A Raptor X RAID 0 array isn't good enough to lick the feet of a Cheetah 15k RAID 0.
 
Hi,
I have an idea about your question... You could always do what i did. You could go and get yourself a used Scsi raid controller on ebay. I bought one for my computer (20.00 dollars, 30.00 with shipping) and it works perfectly. There are no moving parts, so as long as the board isn't fried it will last a long time.

That will save you alot of money and as long as you are only hooking up one 15,000 hd you should not be limited by the bandwidth of a PCI slot...

Hope that Helps..
I love to upgrade too.
 
Proof,

Is there a palpable difference between your Cheetahs and the Raptors? Is the difference measurable e.g. 3 sec faster OS opening etc?

What are you using the Cheetahs for?

I notice that the 74G Fujitsu models are a little more expensive than the 74G Cheatahs - is there a difference between them?
 
It is at least 3 1/2 to 4 seconds faster booting. The Cheetahs are your best bet. Tried and true SCSIs. I can sell you a SCSI if you want?
 
Actually it is shown that when you OC a Raptor to 12,000 RPM's, they perform at or above that of a cheetah.

I think WD's new tools allow you to OC even beyond that rotational speed, but you will have to check it out. I wish tom would benchmark the drives OC'd.
 
This caveat probably sums it up best - from Fedor's link above:

"A Word of Caution to Power Users
It is all too common for an enthusiast to believe that his or her usage pattern is closer to that of a server's rather than a desktop's. This idea arises from a variety of sources- "I multitask a lot," "I hear the hard drive grinding away," "I deal with lots of huge files," etc. The truth is, however, that even the heaviest, grinding multitasker experiences disk access patterns that are far more localized in nature than the truly random access that servers undergo. Individuals who choose a hard drive based on its prowess in IOMeter with the belief that their usage habits mimic a server simply do themselves a disservice. It is measures such as the SR Office and High-End DriveMarks that most accurately depict a non-server's response, whether it be the sheer speed experienced under intense disk access or the "snap and feel" associated with intermittent but bursty operations."

It seems that in my case although the data is heavy it is still "localized." This seems to be the defining distinction relative to using a SCSI or raptor. According to the article then, I should see a performance boost over scsi by using raptors.
 
Actually it is shown that when you OC a Raptor to 12,000 RPM's, they perform at or above that of a cheetah.

I think WD's new tools allow you to OC even beyond that rotational speed, but you will have to check it out. I wish tom would benchmark the drives OC'd.
Click to expand...

You're entering Baron territory now! 8O
 
Yup I agree, the Raptors will most probably do a better job.

And as for people like Proof thinking that 2 Cheetahs would blow 2 Raptors away, I'm afraid to say you're very very wrong. Especially since you are talking Cheetahs instead of like the Fujitsu MAU/MAX, since Cheetahs are (relatively speaking) terrible at single-user performance, that goes for all the versions (.3, .4 and .5 - but the .4 performs best of the three in single-user when you select the right option from SeaTools Enterprise).
 
Actually it is shown that when you OC a Raptor to 12,000 RPM's, they perform at or above that of a cheetah.

I think WD's new tools allow you to OC even beyond that rotational speed, but you will have to check it out. I wish tom would benchmark the drives OC'd.
Click to expand...

You're entering Baron territory now! 8O


Shame on you.
If i said: On AMD systems, you can OC raptor hard drives... then maybe.
 
You need to download the WD OC tools software then per instructions, purchase a faster spindle motor with direct AC control. After installing and rewiring the hard drive, you can increase or decrease the speed of the drive, up to 12k RPM last i checked.


Granted the motor is 55$ and you could lose everything taking the drive apart, might not be worth it.
 
No, your Cheetah's will perform roughly on par with one Raptor actually in a single-user environment. You'd be MUCH better off forgetting that stupid RAID0 array and just installing the OS on one, and having the pagefile on the other. But of course the fact that you actually believe the guy who says you can OC a Raptor says a lot about you!

Everyone witness the "OMG 15K rpm" effect I mentioned earlier, perfect example.
 
Look at my sig. I have 2GB or RAM. I don't need a page file. And, after having BOTH a single Raptor and a Cheetah RAID0 array I can tell you that the RAID0 setup anihilates the Raptor. Why don't you get off that pedestal and grace us with some of your own PERSONAL experiences with these drives. I have tried many different setups with SCSIs in my rig and this is the best performer. Better than the Raptor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom