First off, we have Western Digital’s new Raptor with a rotation speed of a whopping 10 000 revolutions per minute, hinting about good access times.
Its competitors are Western Digital’s and Seagate’s mainstream harddrives, namely 120 GB models with 8 MB cache. Both Seagate’s Barracuda and Western’s Raptor are equipped with SATA; the new harddrive interface whose popularity increases quite fast on the market.
When it comes
to storage, we at NordicHardware have been a bit lazy lately. However, today
we will take a closer look at three harddrives with pretty different characteristics
to remedy this period of inactivity.
First off, we have Western Digital’s new Raptor with a rotation speed of a
whopping 10 000 revolutions per minute, hinting about good access times.
Its competitors are Western Digital’s and Seagate’s mainstream harddrives,
namely 120 GB models with 8 MB cache. Both Seagate’s Barracuda and Western’s
Raptor are equipped with SATA; the new harddrive interface whose popularity
increases quite fast on the market.
|
Specifications:
Western Digital Raptor 36.7GB
|
|
Storage capacity |
36.7
GB
|
|
Rotation speed |
10
000 RPM
|
|
Access time |
5.2
ms
|
|
Cache size |
8
MB
|
| Interface |
SATA
|
|
Accessories |
–
|
| Noise-level |
32
dBA
|
With its pitiful
36.7 GB, the storage capacity is hardly something to write home about. Compared
to the giants of today, it’s almost ridiculously little storage space. Has
Western Digital, known to be far ahead in development, made a big mistake,
or what’s it all about? Of course not. A closer look at the specifications
reveals that this is a neat little speeder that spins at fully 10000 RPM.
The number of revolutions per minute (RPM) largely, though not totally, decides
how fast the harddrive is; the faster the discs spins, the lower average access
time.
The seek time
is not bad either. With a mere 5.2 ms, Western Digital sets a new record in
terms of non-SCSI connected harddrives. Obviously, this speed merchant is
equipped with the new SATA interface, which allows for a theoretical transfer
speed of 150 MB/s, compared to the 133 MB per second that ATA133 offers. Sadly,
there are no harddrives that can deliver 150 MB per second, but SATA has got
many pros against the former PATA version (also called ATA and sometimes IDE),
having nothing to do with the transfer speed. First of all, the cables are
much thinner, thus increasing air circulation in the case and allowing for
the cables to be better arranged. Furthermore, the CPU load becomes a tad
lower, and as if it that wasn’t enough, the SATA interface is Hot-Swap compatible,
making it possible to add and remove your harddrives during operation without
any problems. Isn’t that something that you always have dreamt of? Maybe not
the most useful feature ever invented, but as long as there aren’t any cons,
just go ahead!
PCB |
|
|
The harddrive
is also equipped with the 8 MB cache memory, which has become a standard at
Western Digital; the Special Edition harddrives are suddenly not so special
anymore. Most harddrive manufacturers equip their better models with 8 MB
cache, so it’s not unexpected that this harddrive is equally endowed. According
to the specifications, the harddrive generates 32 dBA of noise, which is very
little considering the high RPM.
The Raptor is
quite much heavier than a regular 3,5" harddrive, and has a built-in
heatsink to better handle the heat generated by the fast spinning drive. Apart
from the heatsink, the harddrive looks like something from the 80’s with its
shell looking awfully old-fashioned. Somewhat boring for a super-fast harddrive,
but how many are really staring at their harddrives frequently?
The connection
aspect is very unlike ordinary PATA disks; firstly, there is no wide connector
for the data cable. The data cable is actually the thinnest of all the three
available connections. Moreover, there are two power connections; one for
the new SATA power connector and one for the old molex connector. Remember
to only use one of these connections at the time, or you might destroy the
harddrive. The PCB is designed in such a way that every chip except one is
on the inside, for better and worse. That makes the harddrive less sensitive
to static discharges, but the major part of the heat from the chips gets trapped
inside the drive with the motor.
The connection panel on the harddrive. |
|
Something that
I thought would be gone was the jumpers on the backside. They shouldn’t be
needed since SATA only uses one harddrive per channel. Because of this, you
don’t have to set master/slave, and therefore the jumpers should be unnecessary.
The jumper block does sit there, however, completely unnecessary as it seems.
There is a jumper that short-circuits two pins as standard, but according
to WD’s homepage, it doesn’t matter whether the jumper is removed. The two
in the middle are not connected, and the last one makes the harddrive start
in "standby" mode. What that means is still a mystery as I never
noticed any difference at all when I fiddled with the jumper.
Specifications:
Western Digital Caviar 120GB SE
|
Storage
capacity |
120
GB
|
Rotation
speed |
7200
RPM
|
Average
seek time |
8,9
ms
|
Cache
size |
8
MB
|
| Interface |
ATA100
|
| Accessories |
–
|
| Noise-level
|
39
dBA
|
This is without
a doubt Western Digital’s mainstream harddrive. 120 GB has become standard
and the SE version with additional cache has a reasonable price compared to
the 2 MB edition. The 80 GB drives have had their days and the 120 GB drives
give better value for the money you spend. The storage capacity is enough
for most users and with 7200 RPM, which is standard nowadays, you will get
a performance way better than this drive’s slower predecessor.
PCB |
|
From
above |
|
The larger cache
keeps the performance on a nice level, but is nothing exceptional. The drive
is equipped with the older PATA interface with a speed at 100mb/s (ATA100),
but there is also a SATA edition available, which naturally costs a little
extra. However, the benefits of SATA are too few to make any difference to
the average user.
The seek time at 8.9 ms is quite average, possibly a little high. The noise
level at 39 dBA is a bit loud, and for those who prefer a silent computer
there are better solutions. Besides this, there is not much to say. It’s an
ordinary harddrive of good quality made for the average user that still wants
a little more.
Specifications:
Seagate Barracuda 120GB 8MB cache SATA
|
Storage
capacity |
120GB
|
Rotation
speed |
7200RPM
|
Average
seek time |
8.5ms
|
Cache
size |
8MB
|
| Interface |
SATA
|
| Accessories |
–
|
Noise
level |
25dBA
|
Seagate has,
just like Western Digital, a very good reputation when it comes to quality.
The difference is that Seagate for along time has been the silent alternative.
The drive we will look at in this review is the fifth generation of the Barracuda
series.
This drive has the SATA interface, but there is a cheaper PATA edition. I
still recommend PATA, but if there is something in the SATA concept you need,
or if you just hate those broad cables, then go for it.
Note that this model do not have the ordinary power connector, you will need
a special SATA power connector to get it running. There are adaptors available
for those who have PSU’s that is not equipped with this kind of connector.
PCB |
|
From
above |
|
The average seek
time is 8.5 ms, slightly better than the WD drive. The differences are not
that big though, but if you take a look at the noise level you will see on
what point this drive is a strong winner. It only generates 25 dBA, which
is extremely low for a 7200 RPM drive. Though, the silence comes with price;
the Seagate Barracuda produces more heat than other drives.
|
Test system
|
|
Hardware
|
| Processor: |
AMD
XP1700+
|
| Mainboard: |
Abit
NF7-S 2.0
|
| RAM: |
2x256MB
Corsair XMS3700 @ 2-2-2-5
|
|
Graphic card:
|
|
|
Harddrive:
|
Western
Digital 120Gb 7200RPM (SYSTEM)
Western Digital 120Gb 7200RPM
Western Digital 37Gb 10000RPM
Seagate 120Gb 7200RPM
|
|
Sound
card:
|
–
|
|
Network card:
|
–
|
|
Software
|
Operating
system: |
Windows XP Professional (Service Pack 1)
|
| Graphic card drivers: |
nVidia: Detonator 44.03
|
Other
drivers: |
nVidia
nForce Drivers 2.03
|
|
Test software:
|
HDTach
2.61
SiSoft Sandra 2003
ATTO Disk Benchmark
Ziff Davis Winbench 99
|
I was also
going to test the harddrives with a HighPoint SATA RAID card, but the test
programs refused to find the card. The SATA circuit is the integrated one
on the nForce2 mainboard, namely a Silicon Image SiL 3112. Western Digital’s
Caviar was also tested with a PATA->SATA adapter so all drives could
be tested using the same chip.
The performance difference was negligible, therefore both test results are
not included in the graphs.
HDTach is a
faithful old servant that’s been around for a long period of time. For those
of you not familiar with the program, it tests sequential read and write
speeds at several various places on the harddrive. This is due to the drive’s
faster rotation speed at the very outer edge compared to its middle, hence
providing lower transfer rates in the middle. Furthermore, HDTach measures
the access time of the harddrive, which is how long time it takes the drive
to find the requested data.
 |
|
HDTach
results of the Western Digital Raptor
|
|
 |
|
HDTach
results of the Western Digital 120gb disk
|
|
 |
|
HDTach
results of the Seagate Barracuda disk
|
|
Beginning with
the write speed, we can clearly see that Seagate’s Barracuda actually takes
the first place and is superior to the two Western disks. The Raptor has a
slight advantage over the Caviar.
On to read speeds.
The Raptor has the lead with approximately 1 MB/s, and as is to be seen, the
Seagate disk gets a tad out-distanced.
The reason for the Raptor not crushing the two other drives in this test is
it’s lower data density. While developing harddrives, manufacturers must compromise
between high rotation speed, leading to lower seek times, and high data density,
leading to more storage space and faster sequential reads and writes. The
Raptor use a high rotation speed, but has low data density, hence the tiny
storage space and the "slow" sequential reads and writes.
The average access
time is an important factor of how fast a harddrive is. The average access
time is a measurement of how long it takes the drive to find a certain spot
on its disk, and is revealed by taking the seek time plus the time it takes
the disk to spin half a turn. We’ve included the calculations; the formula
is seek time + 30000/RPM. We can see that WD’s Caviar is 0.6 milliseconds
slower than according to its specifications, and that the Barracuda is 0.4
ms faster. Here, the Raptor shows its strength; 8.3 ms is a tremendously low
seeking time.
Atto Disk Benchmark
is a popular free benchmark program testing how fast the harddrive can transfer
data while using different data sizes. The sizes of the written data are stated
in kB, thus the first test is 512 Bytes.
 |
|
The Atto results of the Western Digital Raptor
|
|
 |
|
The Atto results of the Western Digital Caviar
|
|
 |
|
The Atto results of the Seagate Barracuda
|
|
The results from
this test shows the theoretical transfer speeds when you burst write or read
different amounts of data. I had expected the Raptor to win, but the Caviar
is the winner in this test. A very good speed on the smaller data sizes gives
it the first place, at the larger data amounts all the harddrives are almost
equally good. The Raptor wins the two smallest, but after that it is the Caviar
which dominates. The Barracuda places last, begins slowly but is later identical
to the other harddrives.
The Raptor places
last. The Caviar places first but with a very fine margin. The question is
why this test is so different, it might not require that low average access
time. The problem with the tests that we have run this far is that they don’t
reveal real-world-performance in a good way. We will see how the results will
be in the last test, WinBench.
WinBench is a
series of tests that doesn’t measure theoretical performance, but it is made
to reflect the performance at different areas of usage for example Adobe
Photoshop, Frontpage and so on. All the points are then weaved to a final
point, simply like 3DMark for harddrives.
The first test
is labeled Business Disk WinMark 99 and is meant to reflect the performance
using office applications; Word, PowerPoint and so on. Here the Raptor takes
the lead with approx. 1600kB/s, and the Barracuda places last. Not fully unexpected
results, since the theoretical tests showed that the Barracuda has some problem
with the read speed.
The second and
concluding test is called High-End Disk WinMark 99, and it is meant to reflect
the performance during high-end usage. Film editing, image processing and so
on. Here we can see the same pattern as before, but with larger differences.
The Raptor is a whole 10MB/s faster than the Barracuda, and the Caviar is
between the both. Here we can clearly see how the much faster rotation speed
does for the performance.
It is hard to
appoint a direct winner since the different harddrives has got different pros
and cons. The Raptor is not directed towards the average user, with its ~37
gigabyte it’s pretty useless if you don’t do things that require fast harddrives.
If you are into film editing or image processing on a larger scale a raid
setup with Raptors would be the most obvious choice if you don’t want to use
the more expensive SCSI drives. The access time is often the limiting factor
in servers, therefore many small harddrives give better access times than
a large one. The Raptor is designed for this, 37 superfast gigabytes.
The other both
harddrives are meant for the average user who needs more space, but are specialised
in different things. Western Digital’s Caviar is the fast harddrive with a
lot of noise, and Seagate’s Barracuda is the silent harddrive with a little
worse performance. Personally I would go for Western’s Caviar, but it’s a
matter of taste. Remember that almost all harddrives in this genre requires
some sort of cooling, the Barracuda gets very hot during testing and still
I ran it without case.
At last I give
Western Digital’s Raptor the award for innovative product. This pioneer in
high end IDE connected harddrives has earned this award. Personally I hope
for more development in this area.
Western
Caviar 120GB
|
Pros:
+ 8MB Cache memory
+ High performance
Cons:
– High level of noise
|
|
Seagate
Barracuda 120GB
|
Pros:
+ 8MB Cache memory
+ SATA interface
+ Low level of noise
Cons:
– There are faster alternatives |
|
Western
Raptor 36.7GB
|
Pros:
+ Extremely low access time
+ Superb performance
+ SATA interface
Cons:
– Expensive
– High level of noise
– Only 36.7GB
|
|
|
|
Thanks
to Western Digital
for making this review possible!
