Talk:Western Digital Raptor

message: I have got two of these drives (WD1600HLHX-60JJPV0 + HP spare part sticker, FW 04.05G04) and they only link at 3 Gb/s (on my test rig with X99 chipset).
Smartctl shows:
*ATA Version is:   ATA8-ACS (minor revision not indicated)
*SATA Version is:  SATA 2.6, 3.0 Gb/s
--77.240.102.234 (talk) 14:13, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  WD1600HLHX SATA speed is incorrect 

message: As far as I know, there are two revisions of the 1500ADFD:
*WD1500ADFD-00NLR0
*WD1500ADFD-00NLR1
I personally own the 00NLR1, but I don't know what are the differences, and should those be included in the article? Is it new firmware with the NLR1, or something? You can see your version on the XP by going to the Device Manager -> Disk drives. ---Majestic- 23:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WD1500ADFD revisions 

message: It has a speed of 10,000rpm, TCQ. Those are both things usually found on SCSI drives. Serial attached SCSI is very compatible with SATA, since they're both serial; in fact SAS drives can have the same connector as SATA drives. This makes me wonder... are there any other similarities to SCSI or SAS (e.g SCSI commands)? Is it only called a SATA because it works on motherboards with SATA controllers instead of SAS/SCSI ones?
Should this drive be considered a slightly original SAS drive or a very unorthodox SATA drive? 
--KX36 13:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to SCSI 

message: I've tidied up the model information, added a table showing all of the available models past & present (including the 80GB & 160GB Raptor made exclusively by Western Digital for Dell, for use in their OEM systems).  See this page for more info. --Durzel 12:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tidied up page, 80GB & 160GB Dell edition added 

message: The two which I have lack the molex connector.  Should this be included somewhere? --159.28.160.241 00:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  80GB Dell edition 

message: -- nae'blis 06:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image:Raptor74_l.jpg

message: The section about the revised edition of the 74gb Raptor says that it has a bad implementation of NCQ, and it has little performance advantage except for the larger buffer.  Where did that information come from?  I searched all over the net and found nothing.  I think the citation of this source of information should be noted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rigurat (talk • contribs) 07:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The revised 74gb has bad NCQ? Where's the citation? 

message: Does anybody know of the WD800ADFD model has the dodgy NCQ of the WD740ADFD, or the improved version that the page says that the WD1500ADFD has?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jason404 (talk • contribs) 08:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WD800ADFD 

message: WD's page said that they released a 2.5 in VelociRaptor drive that is basically a 3.5 VelociRaptor without the icepack. Should we mention this in the article? --76.234.100.201 (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: and so, I have mentioned said topic (my IP address changed)--99.162.181.113 (talk) 20:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  2.5 in velociraptor 

message: I am sitting here looking at a few of my WD drives. Here is what they read:
*WD1600ADFS 160gb, SATA-3GB/s, 10K
*WD1600ADFD 160gb, SATA, 10K
This makes it seem like the info on the page now is slightly incorrect regarding the Dell/HP WD Raptors. Should it be changed ? I could provide pictures of the drives as confirmation or does somebody want to look into this ?
: my WD1600HLHX does 3Gb/s only, added it to top of this talk page as a separate point --77.240.102.234 (talk) 14:13, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dell/HP Raptors 

message: The WD Raptor 150GB 3,5" SATA-1 HDD (exact typecode WD1500-ADFD-00NLR0) has a hidden easter egg. If one boots from the WD DLGDiag DOS CD-ROM and selects "5 minute quick test", the drive will make sounds perfectly imitating a racecar revving around the track and switching to higher and higher gears. It takes about 80 seconds and sounds very convincing, just like it had a V-8 under the top cover! 82.131.210.163 (talk) 14:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Easter Egg 

message: Most, or all, of the WD links are bad. 108.69.248.199 (talk) 16:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad links