I guess WD is still profiting off the Velociraptor line. I had thought that people had long migrated to SSDs
While you don't get SSD performance with these drives you get something close to them (bar random read/write) and you get massive storage. This is an excellent drive for someone on a tighter budget.Originally Posted by mott555
I find it odd that drives like this can compete now that SSD's are rapidly becoming affordable. Apparently people still buy Velociraptors.
Why would data centers being using consumer HDDs? Hitachi (being bought by WD) are the big players in enterprise storage.Originally Posted by RussianGrimmReaper
Not everyone wants to have two drives. Also, these are hella popular for Data Centers
....that's only in sequential performance. However, most disk operations are random (90%+) and SSDs are 5-80 times faster.Originally Posted by illusive snpr
I love my Raptor HDD's. In Raid 0 they even beat my SSD now if I had a newer SSD that would be a different case but the Cost/speed/storage ratio is perfect for me. I really use them for jsut steam games, music and videos so I will most likely be upgrading to 2 of these and ditching my 320gb's.
SSDs are still providing 2-3x times faster in sequential and still a lot faster in random. A hybrid solution with caching probably is better for consumer workloads at the same pricing point.Originally Posted by Liranan
While you don't get SSD performance with these drives you get something close to them (bar random read/write) and you get massive storage. This is an excellent drive for someone on a tighter budget.
Quote:
Yah, Velociraptors are reliable and offer a nice bang for the buck. The price on the new 150GB SATA 3 drives is still the same as when I bought mine 4 years ago. Not bad considering the supply/pricing issues of late.Originally Posted by Rubers
I can't afford an SSD and I don't like to go backwards in terms of HDD space.
its not like these are affordable either...Originally Posted by Rubers
I can't afford an SSD and I don't like to go backwards in terms of HDD space.
If someone has a tight budget, I don't think the velociraptor is the answer as it costs $320.Originally Posted by Liranan
While you don't get SSD performance with these drives you get something close to them (bar random read/write) and you get massive storage. This is an excellent drive for someone on a tighter budget.
Unfortunately even these are beyond what I can afford, as I am about to move again and I am waiting for Trinity before I decide whether I need to upgrade my CPU, motherboard and memory and those three things are far more important than a super fast, small capacity SSD.
...not saying that SSD's are not faster in most cases. Im just saying for mass storage space and price and performance these drives work quite well. $640 for a 2tb raptor setup vs a couple thousand for a 2tb SSD setup... Not like you will see the difference in random writes or reads when your simply using it for storing media...Originally Posted by DuckieHo
Why would data centers being using consumer HDDs?
....that's only in sequential performance. However, most disk operations are random (90%+) and SSDs are 5-80 times faster.
4x 7200 RPM hdd's in raid 0. Cheaper than this velociraptor, faster, and probably about the same reliability.Originally Posted by illusive snpr
...not saying that SSD's are not faster in most cases. Im just saying for mass storage space and price and performance these drives work quite well. $640 for a 2tb raptor setup vs a couple thousand for a 2tb SSD setup... Not like you will see the difference in random writes or reads when your simply using it for storing media...
If you want to negate random performance, why use use Raptors for mass storage? RAID improves sequential performance near linearly.Originally Posted by illusive snpr
...not saying that SSD's are not faster in most cases. Im just saying for mass storage space and price and performance these drives work quite well. $640 for a 2tb raptor setup vs a couple thousand for a 2tb SSD setup... Not like you will see the difference in random writes or reads when your simply using it for storing media...
Depends... higher-end servers use 10K or 15K SAS drives. However, standard 7200RPM 3.5" or 2.5" HDDs are used in some cases (like Google servers).Originally Posted by dr/owned
This. Don't servers use 15k rpm SCSI drives or something?
True, but then you getting into a higher risk of drive failure, more heat, more energy, more physical space used.Originally Posted by dr/owned
4x 7200 RPM hdd's in raid 0. Cheaper than this velociraptor, faster, and probably about the same reliability.
That does make sense and the price per gb at 5x2tb makes sense I just like having 2 drives. Also if your running a setup of 5 drives in any raid format I would have a "good" raid controller not using my onboard controller.Originally Posted by DuckieHo
If you want to negate random performance, why use use Raptors for mass storage? RAID improves sequential performance near linearly.
$640 for a 2TB Raptor
$2400 for 2TB SSD
.... or $270 for 3x1TB RAID5 HDDs.
.... or $640 for 5x2TB RAID5 HDDs.
Standard 7200RPM can provide more sequential performance, reliability, redundancy, lower costs, and/or more storage.
Depends... higher-end servers use 10K or 15K SAS drives. However, standard 7200RPM 3.5" or 2.5" HDDs are used in some cases (like Google servers).
Heat, energy, and space issues are generally not high priorities in consumer systems. Price, space, and performance are generally more important.Originally Posted by illusive snpr
True, but then you getting into a higher risk of drive failure, more heat, more energy, more physical space used.
Originally Posted by DuckieHo
It comes down to:
Sequential read - SSD
Sequential write - SSD
Random read - SSD
Random write - SSD
Reliability - HDD
Validation - dont know how to label this.
Price - HDD
Storage Size - HDD
Power consumption - SSD
Physical size - SSD
