Which Brand for sata II?

[Steevo]

I am beginning to hate raptors.



Numerous benchmarks and other testing done at sites has proven the two disks with higher aerial density and 7200K with NCQ are faster at the things we do with them. RAID, stand alone, or otherwise.

If you truly want fast, cough up the money for SAS and a RAID card. Or just get two sata perp drives and RAID them.

 

[David_L6]

RAID 0 is all when and good until one of the drives in your stripe set fails and you lose ALL the data on all the drives in the array set.

True.

What happens when you have one hard drive in your computer and it fails?

 

[Steevo]

MTBF is half the time due to possible defects when you have two drives. And I have been able to recover alot of drives data by changing the PCB, or by putting it into a hot swap situation and copying the raw data off the drive or by transfering files.

 

[LordOfLA]

Toms hardware guide and storage review have a comparisson I think, though tihose sites only compared the seagate 750 perpendicular disks, the smaller capacities are just as fast but cheaper obviously.

Perpendicular disks are stupid fast at 7200 rpm spindle speed and really are not much slower than raptors with stupidly low capacities and higher rotation speed.

 

[Aprox]

Althought I dont have the specs in front of me, I think it would be safe to say that the 10k rpm drives would have a much faster random access time, write times, latency, etc etc.

Those are all very important, especially in real time video editing and games that load content in real time.

I would like to know more about these Seagate HD's you guys are talking about though.

 

[LordOfLA]

Aprox,

If the 10k rpm drives were so much faster I would not be diverting attention to the perpendicular disks. They are litteraly within 2-3MB/sec real transfer throughput slower than the 10krpm disks yet rotate at only 7200rpm. The 10k rpm disks are not worth the premium over seagates perpendicular disks.

Edit: professional and serious hobbyists use SCSI for video editting anyway as these disks are capable of sustained high throughput rates irrespective of where the disk head is currently located, whereas IDE and SATA slow down as they approach the centre of the disk.

 

[Aprox]

I have not heard about these perpendicular HD's, thats why I asked about them in my previous post.

The problem with SCSI is that its VERY expensive, thats why the raptors are a good alternative. Their capacity might be smaller, but they are pleanty for a single DV/HDV video project, Not as much raw HD, but most pepople dont work with raw HD anyways. You just cant use them for long term storage.

 

[American Zombie]

Perpendicular Recording

 

[LeeJend]

They store the magentic field down into the disk instead of spreading it across the drive surface. More bits per CM of track length means higher transfer rates.

They are being targeted at the high dollar laptop and micro drive market. There are no 3.5 inch drives available yet.

The 2.5 inch drives from seagate only spin at 5400 RPM. Getting speed up will be a technical challenge for a while with the perpendicular drives due to the physics of the head field and driving the field down into the material as opposed to spreading it on the surface. So don't expect any super drives soon.

 

[American Zombie]

There are no 3.5 inch drives available yet.

The Seagate 7200.10 drives have been out for a few months now and in this review they outperform Raptors at some tests.