Hey codesmith!

[supercheyenne]

You wanted me to run hd tach on my 0 raid dual raptors?
Did you want the basic or "heavy" (forgot the actual terms) test? I'll run either, just didn't know what you wanted.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

PM? - Private Message?

______________
Read the friggin FAQ, and use the search button or I'll kick yer face in!

 

[Codesmith]

Run the long test. And a PM would have been more effective

 

[Rugger]

I shouldn't say this, but SCSI are cheap! 😱

When you say something like that you have to back it up - spill your guts on why SCSI is "cheap!" I'd definitely be interested in seeing the Raptor vs Compaq vs Cheetah performance comparison. I'll settle for the Raptor vs Compaq until you get the Cheetah.

How can you be sure they'll last another 5yrs? Are you talking performance wise or hdd longevity?

__________________________________________________
:tongue: <font color=red>Have you read the FAQ? Searched for other posts on this topic?</font color=red>

 

[Rugger]

I'd say that qualifies as cheap - great deal man! 😱

__________________________________________________
:tongue: <font color=red>Have you read the FAQ? Searched for other posts on this topic?</font color=red><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Rugger on 03/03/05 05:35 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Codesmith]

The benchmarks won't do the SCSI drive justice.

For raw transfer rate and the Raptor should win. Should win in general desktop performance as well.

But I think it will be awhile before the various command queuing options for ATA drives mature enough for those drives to pose a real challenge to SCSI as far as server performance goes.

And it will also be awhile before they catch up to SCSI in terms of reliablity.

Short development cycles & reliablity don't mix.

Thats why I think WD is going to stretch out the Raptor releases rather than make small incremental advances.

 

[supercheyenne]

Hope you got the return message. I didn't see a history in my "sent messages".

I'll repost here just in case.
Burst speed = 233.3 MB/s
Random access = 8.0ms
CPU Utilization = 5% (+/- 2%)
Average Read = 122.4 MB/s

Hope this helps.