WD Velociraptor 10k 300GB SATA vs Seagate Cheetah 15K 300GB SAS

[kd_rome]

I was wondering if any of you guys has seen a benchmark with these 2 drives.
I regularly check barefeats.com and I saw they have a benchmark for the Raptor vs other SATA, and then they have an older post with the Cheetah vs other SATA.
I'd like to see a test done at the same time, one vs the other, anyone seen it around?

Thanks!

 

[zmttoxics]

I was wondering if any of you guys has seen a benchmark with these 2 drives.
I regularly check barefeats.com and I saw they have a benchmark for the Raptor vs other SATA, and then they have an older post with the Cheetah vs other SATA.
I'd like to see a test done at the same time, one vs the other, anyone seen it around?

Thanks!

As far as I know the SAS drives are faster then Sata, not to mention its 15k versus 10k.

Also, on top of that, I hate WD. Please don't get me started on it. All I am going to say is Seagate has a 5 year warranty instead of 3 and its worth it.

EDIT: Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_Attached_SCSI SAS is the same transfer rate as SATAII at the moment with double that planned for 2009.

 

[kd_rome]

I'm not a big fan of WD either...very very loud drives in the past but other than that not real issues.

What I don't understand is why there are so many people excited about the Velociraptor if the Cheetah is faster and doesn't need any mod to slide in the bay?

I'd really like to see a benchmark!!!

 

[zmttoxics]

I'm not a big fan of WD either...very very loud drives in the past but other than that not real issues.

What I don't understand is why there are so many people excited about the Velociraptor if the Cheetah is faster and doesn't need any mod to slide in the bay?

I'd really like to see a benchmark!!!

Price. The Cheetahs are mostly SCSI or SAS which require extra controller cards. All of which are at a high cost.

 

[kd_rome]

Just saw the prices! It looks like the SAS cost double!
So I have no experience with the SAS, but it seems like it just plugs in the mac pro without any extra parts?

EDIT: I was just reading on the apple website that a SAS drive requires a Mac Raid Card?
Is it true?

 

[Gonk42]

Just saw the prices! It looks like the SAS cost double!
So I have no experience with the SAS, but it seems like it just plugs in the mac pro without any extra parts?

EDIT: I was just reading on the apple website that a SAS drive requires a Mac Raid Card?
Is it true?

Yes it is true which adds £400-£500 or $800 to the cost of adding SAS drives. Also it mucks up running Windows in bootcamp. There are lots of threads on this if you do some searching. There may be alternative controller cards with or without raid but I don't know much about them.

 

[kd_rome]

Yes I've read a lot on the forum about the RAID card, but had no idea that it was required to run SAS drives.

So if you install a SAS drive you cannot install SATA drives on the other slots? Am I reading right?

 

[Gonk42]

Yes I've read a lot on the forum about the RAID card, but had no idea that it was required to run SAS drives.

So if you install a SAS drive you cannot install SATA drives on the other slots? Am I reading right?

In theory the RAID controller, like all SAS controllers will also run SATA drives so you can mix the two under OS X - you can't run the card under Windows and Windows will only boot with the drives unplugged when the card is in (I think).

Some people argue (and there are one or two things on the web) that it is not a good idea to mix SAS and SATA drives because they physically rotate at different speeds and the vibrations affect each other but other people say that this is nonsense.

There are much cheaper RAID cards (like Caldigit I think) but they seem to be SATA only.

There are other more inventive solutions like adding a SATA drive to the second optical port using the extra connections on the motherboard.

 

[JeffDM]

I was wondering if any of you guys has seen a benchmark with these 2 drives.
I regularly check barefeats.com and I saw they have a benchmark for the Raptor vs other SATA, and then they have an older post with the Cheetah vs other SATA.
I'd like to see a test done at the same time, one vs the other, anyone seen it around?

Thanks!

I think the main problem is that the Velociraptor doesn't go in without a bit of adjustment, an adapter (which I haven't heard about) or as an external drive with a SATA card.

That said, I just installed one. The only "mod" is that I removed the two screws holding the computer-side SATA connector in place, and it takes a little bit of jockeying to get the connector to hook up. Then there's the possibility of putting the drive in the second optical bay, that's a little trickier.

 

[Umbongo]

I'm not a big fan of WD either...very very loud drives in the past but other than that not real issues.

What I don't understand is why there are so many people excited about the Velociraptor if the Cheetah is faster and doesn't need any mod to slide in the bay?

I'd really like to see a benchmark!!!

If you thought WD drives were loud then wait until you hear a SAS drive spinning at full whack. Also unless something has changed in the last couple of months WD SATA drives are currently quieter than Seagate.

This link might be useful to you, it compares a 15K RPM 300GB Seagate with the Velociraptor. Although the Seagate is SCSI there is barely any difference between the SCSI and SAS version as far as I am aware.

 

[kd_rome]

Thanks guys and thanks Umbongo, that's exactly what i was looking for!

 

[Rick Here]

I posted earlier a link to a site that claims WD will be coming out with a velociraptor in the correct 3.5" connector form factor, so no screw removal is necessary. Also the velociraptor warranty is 5 years !
Purchasing the MAC RAID card at $800 versus 4 of these newer velociraptors and set up a SW raid. Hmmm....
At 120MB/sec sustained each in SW raid
this may outdo the RAID card (RAID0).

Here are WD drive specifications.
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=459