Western Digital VelociRaptor WD1500HLHX

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Western Digital VelociRaptor WD1500HLHX

Our Linux hardware review today is of the Western Digital VelociRaptor, an enterprise-grade HDD that Western Digital claims is the "Fastest SATA Hard Drive On The Planet." The Serial ATA 3.0 disk drive spins at 10,000 RPM, but how's its Linux performance?

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19549

[uid313]

SSD killed VelociRaptor.
There is no need for a VelociRaptor, just get an SSD instead.

[philip550c]

I have the 1TB version of this drive and I love it, the fact that I can get it at the 1TB size is why I prefer it over an ssd. I have ssds in my laptops and they do feel faster but I run out of space so quickly. The raptor is a nice compromise for me and I think I will pick up another one and use raid 0. If I do that I will benchmark it before and after.

[uid313]

I have the 1TB version of this drive and I love it, the fact that I can get it at the 1TB size is why I prefer it over an ssd. I have ssds in my laptops and they do feel faster but I run out of space so quickly. The raptor is a nice compromise for me and I think I will pick up another one and use raid 0. If I do that I will benchmark it before and after.

I would rather just get an 256 GB SSD then 3-4 TB HDD.
Put the system on the SSD, then put media on the HDD.

[philip550c]

I would rather just get an 256 GB SSD then 3-4 TB HDD.
Put the system on the SSD, then put media on the HDD.

I could but what I might also do is use the raptor and an ssd for caching, like a hybrid or fusion drive. Also the raptor is an enterprise drive so in theory it should last longer than an ssd and the regular hhd. Also no ssd can hold my steam library on its own.

[a user]

Also the raptor is an enterprise drive so in theory it should last longer than an ssd

no, not even close. in theory and practice the ssds will last by far longer than any hdd.

a bit offtopic but it made me very said that only seagate and WD remained on the hdd market. i had 5 WD drives up till now and not a single one survived significant more than 2 years, while 3 went bad after about a year (for two of them i got a new one due to warranty and they also failed after about 2 1/2 years). in my small experience WD are the loudest and with the shortest lifetime i ever used. oh and they were all claimed long lasting modells, 4 of them with 3 years warranty.

i only had a single seagate more than 10 years ago but i read they consume more power and are louder than the wd,

believe it or not but all my samsung drivers are still working fine (the yungest is 3 years old) and they were all less noisy than all my WD i had.
i now have for the very first time an issue with oune of them. it seesm the spin motor fails sometimes to start the disks spinning. and i have no clue what to take for subsitution. i'm looking for a wd red but i fear it will be louder and break after 2 years, as all my WD did more or less.

[GreatEmerald]

i only had a single seagate more than 10 years ago but i read they consume more power and are louder than the wd,

A laptop I maintain had a WD Scorpio Blue (it's the one that kills itself after a while due to its power saving "features"). Recently I replaced it with an equivalent Seagate drive, and it's by far not louder, quite the opposite. And I don't think it consumes more power than the WD drives (after their self-destroying features are turned off).

[HeavensRevenge]

All of you left clinging to spinning mechanical drives are still in the stone age... guess some people just wont learn or somehow use the excuse of a steam library and need a TB to store it even though you maybe play 100GB worth of it.
I "use the right tool for the right job" and store my primary OS etc on a 256GB SSD and I use ~120GB of it. And I store random archival stuff on an external where the data is meant to be.

[mendieta]

I would rather just get an 256 GB SSD then 3-4 TB HDD.
Put the system on the SSD, then put media on the HDD.

That's my set up, actually:

• One SSD for the system (including /home), just one simple partition
• One large, green (silent, low heat) HDD for media
• One large HDD for backups of everything (media and /home)

This works great on a desktop. On a low cost laptop, a single hdd still makes sense. Case in point, my son's chromebook, where he uses steam in a crouton chroot.

[a user]

A laptop I maintain had a WD Scorpio Blue (it's the one that kills itself after a while due to its power saving "features"). Recently I replaced it with an equivalent Seagate drive, and it's by far not louder, quite the opposite. And I don't think it consumes more power than the WD drives (after their self-destroying features are turned off).

hmm, is there one you would recommend for home nas usecase, at least 2 TB better 3 TB capacity?


@ HeavensRevenge:
of whom are you talking about? ssd's are yet no full substitution for hdds due to there capacity. sure there are awsome in laptops, are decent for a windows system partition (it becomes as fast as linux on a hdd) etc. but when ever you need a lot of space you need a hdd.