Western Digital Unleashes the Fierce VelociRaptor VR150

Rob Williams

Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Moderator
From our front-page news:
It's been quite some time since Western Digital has issued a follow-up to their Raptor line-up, but that happens now, with the help of their "VelociRaptor" VR150 drive. What's this mean to you? More space, faster speeds, quieter operation and oddly enough, lower power consumption.

The biggest issue with previous EL150 drives was their density. Granted, 10K RPM is undoubtedly fast, but when you only get a maximum of 150 GB out of the drive, it's a definite trade off. Most things were done right with the VR150, however. Despite being physically smaller (2.5" compared to 3.5"), it has faster seek times, higher data rates and as I mentioned, lower power consumption. It seems like the perfect drive.

But even at 300 GB, there are a few issues. The first is the price, at $1 per GB. The second is that the drive utilizes a 16 MB Cache, whereas most other high-end desktop drives use 32 MB. What differences could be seen are unknown, but it would have been a nice number regardless. Our friends at the Tech Report were so impressed with WD's new offering, it deserved their Editor's Choice award, so don't hesitate to take a look at their (exhaustive) review.

<table align="center"><tbody><tr><td>
wd_vr150_tr_042108.jpg

Credit: Tech Report </td></tr></tbody></table>
The VelociRaptor offers excellent performance across a wide range of applications, but its most spectacular showing was easily with IOMeter's multi-user workloads. These workloads don't simulate typical desktop environments, of course, but they're the most demanding tests we run. And they make a heck of a case for an enterprise derivative of the VelociRaptor. The 2.5" form factor is perfect for rack-mount systems where the VelociRaptor's low power consumption and strong multi-user performance will surely be appreciated.

Source: Tech Report
 

Kougar

Techgage Staff
Staff member
I'm personally looking forward to the Anandtech review, apparently they realized what was up with the performance figures: http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=432

Best sustained throughput, best seek times, and still beaten by 7200RPM drives? Interesting that WD couldn't wait to actually complete their firmware before launching, nobody seems to do launch with completed firmware/drivers anymore.
 

Rob Williams

Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Moderator
I can understand shipping out certain products to reviewers prior to an official launch (CPUs, for example), but to ship out an unfinished hard drive strikes me a little odd.

I for one will still have no problem sticking to a single 500 GB+ 7200RPM drive for $110. The one I have on this machine is fast, and I'm the kind of person who loves high-end gaming, but doesn't care if a level takes 3s more to load, over another model. Game levels nowadays take 20 - 30s to load anyway, so what's another 3s?
 

Krazy K

Partition Master
I read all that and looking at the charts I'm a bit disappointed by the fact that I spent onver $1/Gb on my 150Gb Raptor. I would have liked to see the 10k drives really outpace everything else but it didn't seem that way, but what I did see is the Caviar SE16 640Gb at the top in nearly all of the test. I wonder if it would be worth it to swap out my Raptor 150 main for a raid 10 with a pair of those SE16s. Suggestions?
 

Kougar

Techgage Staff
Staff member
I've used RAID 10 arrays... noticed a huge chunk of level load times simply vanish. On older games it was simply gone completely. I got spoiled from it, going back to a single drive is very noticeable. ;)

I'd highly recommend them with Intel chipsets... Vista already has all the drivers built in so it is no different than installing onto a normal drive even.

Remember that RAID 10 reqiures 4 drive minimum though. It also halves the total GB available. I picked up four Seagate 320GB drives for $59 each for mine. Still cheaper than one of these Velociraptors and higher average reads/writes.
 
Last edited:

Krazy K

Partition Master
My first plan was to give the Raptor a shakedown for a few months ans see if it was worth using them in a RAID 1. But overall I'm not that impressed, it seems to run faster than a standard 7200, but those exhaustive tests by Tech Report show the placebo effect, I won't deny that it isn't faster but overall it isn't. So for $100/640Gb drive I'll start with a RAID 0 and then mirror them in the future.
 

Krazy K

Partition Master
This is the ATA-133 2x250gb raid 0 that I have now. It's not too bad for being a 4 year old system.

HD Tune: ALiATA RAID0 der_RAID Benchmark

Transfer Rate Minimum : 50.9 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 82.3 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 76.2 MB/sec
Access Time : 13.9 ms
Burst Rate : 78.4 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 11.5%
 
Last edited:
Top