Halo 1 & 2 for PC
This topic has moved here: Subject: Hard Drive Question
  • Subject: Hard Drive Question
Subject: Hard Drive Question
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I'm looking to upgrade my Hard Drives. I don't really understand SATA drives...There is IDE Ultra ATA133, ATA100, Serial ATA II, Serial ATA150, SCSI...etc. What should I get if I am going to get a 250gig HD? Or maybe I should get 2 100gig drives in RAID??

  • 06.20.2005 10:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

what motherboard do you have? we can only tell you what to get if we know.

and do you have any cards that have ide or sata or scsi ports on em

  • 06.20.2005 10:59 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Asus A8N SLI Deluxe Board Click Here For Specs

[Edited on 6/20/2005]

  • 06.20.2005 11:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

well it has sata, and the new 3 gb/s sata, so get whatever you want basically ;)

  • 06.20.2005 11:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Thats the thing, I'm not really sure what to get. Is SATA II faster than ATA150 or ATA133? This is what I've come up with:

Max tor MaXLine III 300GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache Serial ATA150 Hard Drive

or

Wes tern Digital Caviar SE 250GB Serial ATA II Hard Drive

Maybe you know something better for the price??

[Edited on 6/21/2005]

  • 06.21.2005 12:01 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Well, the Maxtor Maxline III has a 16MB Cache. And that western digital has a 10,000 RPM. What is better? More Cache or RPM?

  • 06.21.2005 10:25 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

less seek time is what is better - however, faster spinning drives tend to have a lower seek time.

You won't notice the difference with RAID unless you're running a server. I'd go with SATA, personally, since it's the best combination of ease and speed.

KISS

  • 06.21.2005 10:43 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The cache on the WD is 8MB, enough for now. The 16MB cache is great for a server transferring huge files or serving a lot of traffic, but not for a desktop. Overkill. The 10k RPM does help, along with the low [5ms or less] seek time. Seriously, Windows loads in 5 seconds. It's insane. So do games, they load very fast.

Noise - unless you have a silent pc you probably won't even hear it. My system, the Thermaltake Armor, came with really quiet fans and uses watercooling - yes, if I put my ear to the pc I can hear it, but otherwise no. Not even remotely loud as the SCSI drives in my server.

SATA is great. WD Raptor 74GB should suit you. Whatever you do, don't get the 36GB one - so many failures and errors on those, not even worth it.

Then again if you really think you need a lot of space a nice Seagate or Maxtor SATA drive will do you well. 200GB SATA drives are out and not too expensive when compared to a WD. Just look for a low seek time and an 8MB cache.

  • 06.21.2005 11:37 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

This is what my friend said about that...

The cache on the WD is 8MB, enough for now. The 16MB cache is great for a server transferring huge files or serving a lot of traffic, but not for a desktop. Overkill. The 10k RPM does help, along with the low [5ms or less] seek time. Seriously, Windows loads in 5 seconds. It's insane. So do games, they load very fast.

16MB Cache is great for large files yes, but has nothing to do with serving a lot of traffic, and is SPECIFICALLY for Desktop use. Any sort of real server will almost never have access to long contiguous file reads like that.

High RPMs and low Seek time benefit RANDOM ACCESS speeds. Thus, Servers. Serves very little benefit for Desktop PCs.

Think that person might be a bit off.

Noise - unless you have a silent pc you probably won't even hear it. My system, the Thermaltake Armor, came with really quiet fans and uses watercooling - yes, if I put my ear to the pc I can hear it, but otherwise no. Not even remotely loud as the SCSI drives in my server.

Raptors dont seem abnormally noisey to me either. Ive never used one in a quiet PC.

SATA is great. WD Raptor 74GB should suit you. Whatever you do, don't get the 36GB one - so many failures and errors on those, not even worth it.

Its not worth it for the size. Regarding failures, again I think he might be a little off on his facts. Raptors have a full 5 year warranty and are one of the most stable drives you'll ever encounter. These are meant for 24x7 action in servers, which is what I use them for, they don't fail that routinely. I havent lost one yet.

Then again if you really think you need a lot of space a nice Seagate or Maxtor SATA drive will do you well. 200GB SATA drives are out and not too expensive when compared to a WD. Just look for a low seek time and an 8MB cache.

Most Desktops need space. Seek Time doesn't make any difference for Windows Loading or Game applications since they are almost never Random Access, and are in fact, sequential loads (if your defragged) which benefit from lots of HD Cache RAM.

Ive made my point against Raptor drives for Desktop/Gaming rig use for ages here now. People think that by magically slapping in a Server grade drive in to their PC, or that because the Raptor has such great numbers on the outside, they will suddenly see amazing improvement.

No. There is some improvement in some situations, but server hard drives are not MEANT for the same applications that Desktop hard drives are meant for. Things like RPM and Seek benefit Random Access reads, something that might happen on a file or webserver all the time. Basically, things with dozens or hundreds of users doing random things like loading this page or that MP3.

Yet people continue buying them because more expensive = better I guess I have $10,000 servers here that cant play Unreal 2003 for crap.


  • 06.21.2005 5:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

NOTE: SLD specifically referred to the 36 GB Raptors.

  • 06.21.2005 7:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

At another forum the failure rates of the 36GB versions were out of the roof. I said specifically the 36GB version. In fact, more than 1 in 10 were going the way of the buffalo [ie dying out]. That's poor for HD's. Very poor. Consider the current raptor, yes the 5-year warranty, the 130+ year MTBF is a bit outrageous...but they're telling you it will last. However, mine which has been used in my gaming rig for only 3 months has just failed - windows won't even load, telling me the disk is severely damaged. I'm in the process of replacing it...

I woudl like to point out that Windows loads for me used to take 20 seconds or more on my Seagate SATA drive. Come on, 5 seconds on the WD, are you telling me that isn't amazing? I noticed that suddenly my Half Life 2 load times, which, if any of you have played, are obnoxious, were seemingly cut in half. It has made a difference for me. My old drive had an 8MB cache, too. It seems like that wasn't the issue at hand improving my performance.

There is a difference. I won't lie at all - the WD Raptor 74GB version rocks. Bar-none, very awesome. True, it's 50% more expensive, give or take 10%, but you get what you pay for.

Might I ask why you didn't just ask your friend about this anyway...considering from what I've read it sounds like he does work with servers quite a bit. At any rate, you did come to b.net, and even though I may be one of the more knowledgeable ones here about pc's, I'm no HDD god. My area is generally with graphics cards and other things such as cooling and in general helping someone set up a pc.

I'm just starting my Junior year of high school. I picked up on stuff over the last 8 months, I've never taken a class or participated in any sort of job pertaining to pc's. This is a side thing for me.

Again, I wonder why you came here instead of going to him. I have learned a bit more, though. I guess my general thoughts of the servers I usually deal with, like the one at my school used in video yearbook or the one I have here at home, involve transferring files up to 2GB or even more at a time - when a large cache is nice. I should have been more specific and referenced to a large-file server, solely for accessing large files, not tapping quickly into a website or grabbing a document or two.

[Edited on 6/21/2005]

  • 06.21.2005 9:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. That guy is usually pretty hard to get ahold of so I don't normally get long answers like that from him. I have a different question tho...do you think hard drive coolers are worth it? Like this CoolDrive 6 Black HDD Cooler Like do they actually improve performance or make HDD's last longer??

  • 06.26.2005 9:47 PM PDT