Western Digital WD1500ADFD: King Raptor
by Gary Key on February 8, 2006 1:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
Hard Disk Performance: Everest 2.50 / HD Tach
The WD1500 leads the other drives in the average read access, random reads, and linear read categories. The Samsung SP2504c makes a surprise showing in the linear read beginning, random read, and buffered read categories by outscoring the WD740GD.
The WD1500 leads the other drives in the average read access, random reads, and linear read categories. The Samsung SP2504c makes a surprise showing in the linear read beginning, random read, and buffered read categories by outscoring the WD740GD.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
51 Comments
View All Comments
Gary Key - Monday, February 20, 2006 - link
Maybe we should do a RAID 5 test only.....the RAID 0 results are what you expect them to be at this time, very good in two system benchmarks but slower in a couple of games..... ;->
mlittl3 - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
Here you go.http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=rap...">http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=rap...
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/02/06/wd1500ad_ra...">http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/02/06/wd1500ad_ra...
Two articles with raid numbers.
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
The THG review only compares a single 150 Raptor to a RAID 0 with slower drives, but it does use a few real-world benchmarks. The other review tests RAID 0 with these Raptors but only uses synthetic benchmarks. Synthetic benchmarks are useful, but they are only part of the performance picture. Results with real-world benchmarks - particularly in RAID 0 - are very different.Live - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
The tests linked are not very good. GamePC uses synthetic benchmarks which are not indicative of real world desktop performance. The Iometer in particular is not useful for single user scenarios and never was. Basically Gamepc doesn’t know what they are doing (or since they sell the stuff maybe that’s just what they do...)We all RAID-O improves performance a lot in Synthetic benchmarks. It does however not do the same for real world tests and certainly not in a cost effective way. I highly doubt SATA or this new raptor changes that. But would be interesting nonetheless to see some tests on the matter.
rjm55 - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
This is the best hard drive review I've seen on AT in a very long time. Great job, guys. The history of Raptors at the start was a nice touch to help me better understand what WD is doing. I also think this is the first drive review I have seen by Gary Key. Bring us some more like this one.Live - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
I have to agree this was really a step up as far as hardrive reviews go. Nice to see you are improving your thermal and acoustics testing. Keep up the good work!!!Rolphus - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
Agreed - great review, and it was really interesting and useful to get an understanding of the evolution of the product.My only question is, why wasn't Raptor+NCQ added as part of the multi-tasking tested? I can see that being a useful indicator of desktop performance, especially as dual-core CPUs become more prevalent.
Rolphus - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
That would be multi-tasking tests. Only had one coffee so far.Gary Key - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
We will be investigating the effects of NCQ in more detail in the near future. We are working on a revised benchmark suite that consists of more real world applications and varying multi-task scenarios.ohnnyj - Wednesday, February 8, 2006 - link
In some of the graphs there are two 74GB Raptors, are these two different revisions?John