VelociRaptor Redux: Now with final firmware

Manufacturer Western Digital
Model VelociRaptor VR150
Price (Street)
Availability Now

Western Digital hatched its latest Raptor back in April, revealing a unique departure from more traditional designs. This leaner, meaner VelociRaptor VR150 is actually a 2.5″ drive sitting inside a heatsink that slides nicely into standard 3.5″ bays. But don’t think you can take this most recent Raptor lightly just because it’s gone on a diet. Despite a smaller form factor, the VelociRaptor still offers 300GB of capacity—twice that of its 3.5″ forebear. The VR150 is also the first Raptor with a 300MB/s Serial ATA interface, and its trademark 10K-RPM spindle speed hasn’t skipped a beat.

Like its predecessors in their prime, the VelociRaptor proved to be the all-around fastest SATA hard drive on the market—and a surprisingly quiet and power-efficient one, at that. However, the drive we used in our initial look at the VR150 was an engineering sample with pre-production firmware. Final, production drives have now made their way onto the market, and we’ve managed to score a retail sample that should be representative of the drives you can buy today.

Naturally, we’ve run this tuned-up VelociRaptor through the wringer to see if it can live up to the Editor’s Choice distinction we awarded the VR150 after our first encounter. Read on to see whether finished firmware reels in the VelociRaptor’s propensity to outrun the competition or if Western Digital has managed to wring even more performance from its radical Raptor redesign.

Test notes
We’ll be comparing the performance of the VelociRaptor with that of a slew of competitors, including some of the latest and greatest Serial ATA drives from Hitachi, Samsung, Seagate, and Western Digital. These drives differ when it comes to external transfer rates, spindle speeds, cache sizes, platter densities, and capacity, all of which can have an impact on performance. Keep in mind the following differences as we move through our benchmarks:

Max external
transfer rate

Spindle speed

Cache size

Platter size


Native Command

Barracuda 7200.11
300MB/s 7,200-RPM 32MB 250GB 1TB Yes

Barracuda ES.2
300MB/s 7,200-RPM 32MB 250GB 1TB Yes

Caviar GP
300MB/s 5,400-7,200-RPM 16MB 250GB 1TB Yes

Caviar SE16 (640GB)
300MB/s 7,200-RPM 16MB 320GB 640GB Yes

Deskstar 7K1000
300MB/s 7,200-RPM 32MB 200GB 1TB Yes

Raptor X
150MB/s 10,000-RPM 16MB 75GB 150GB Yes

Raptor WD1500ADFD

10,000-RPM 16MB 75GB 150GB Yes

300MB/s 5,400-7,200-RPM 16MB 250GB 1TB Yes

SpinPoint F1
300MB/s 7,200-RPM 32MB 334GB 1TB Yes

VelociRaptor VR150
300MB/s 10,000-RPM 16MB 150GB 300GB Yes

We should note that our WD1500ADFD has a slightly newer firmware revision than the Raptor X sample we’ve had since February 2006. The drives still share identical internals, but firmware optimizations could give our newer Raptor an edge over the X in some tests.

Performance data from such a daunting collection of drives can make our graphs a little hard to read, so we’ve color-coded our bar graphs based on each drive’s manufacturer. We’ve also used some fancy fade effects to make the VelociRaptor stand out a little from the rest of the pack. You’ll find color-coding in our line graphs, too, but pay close attention, because the colors don’t match our bar charts.

Naturally, we’ve included VelociRaptor engineering sample results from our initial review of the drive. Pay special attention to how these VelociRaptor ES scores compare with those of our final VR150.

Our testing methods
All tests were run three times, and their results were averaged, using the following test system.

Processor Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.4GHz
System bus 800MHz (200MHz quad-pumped)
Motherboard Asus P5WD2 Premium
Bios revision 0422
North bridge Intel 955X MCH
South bridge Intel ICH7R
Chipset drivers Chipset
Memory size 1GB (2 DIMMs)
Memory type Micron DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz
CAS latency (CL) 3
RAS to CAS delay (tRCD) 3
RAS precharge (tRP) 3
Cycle time (tRAS) 8
Audio codec ALC882D
Graphics Radeon X700 Pro 256MB with CATALYST 5.7 drivers
Hard drives Western Digital Raptor X 150GB SATA
Western Digital Raptor WD1500ADFD 150GB SATA
Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000 1TB SATA

Western Digital RE2-GP 1TB
Western Digital Caviar GP 1TB SATA
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 1TB SATA
Seagate Barracuda ES.2 1TB SATA
Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB SATA
Western Digital Caviar SE16 640GB SATA

Western Digital VelociRaptor VR150 300GB
OS Windows XP Professional
OS updates Service Pack 2

Thanks to the folks at Newegg for hooking us up with the DiamondMax 11 we used for testing. Also, thanks to NCIX for getting us the Deskstar 7K1000 and Spinpoint F1.

Our test system was powered by OCZ PowerStream power supply units. The PowerStream was one of our Editor’s Choice winners in our last PSU round-up.

We used the following versions of our test applications:

The test systems’ Windows desktop was set at 1280×1024 in 32-bit color at an 85Hz screen refresh rate. Vertical refresh sync (vsync) was disabled for all tests.

All the tests and methods we employed are publicly available and reproducible. If you have questions about our methods, hit our forums to talk with us about them.

WorldBench overall performance
WorldBench uses scripting to step through a series of tasks in common Windows applications. It then produces an overall score. WorldBench also spits out individual results for its component application tests, allowing us to compare performance in each. We’ll look at the overall score, and then we’ll show individual application results.

The VR150 gets off to a somewhat disappointing start in WorldBench, where it scores lower than our engineering sample. One point isn’t much, though.

Multimedia editing and encoding

MusicMatch Jukebox

Windows Media Encoder

Adobe Premiere

VideoWave Movie Creator

Final firmware hasn’t changed the VelociRaptor’s performance much across WorldBench’s multimedia editing and encoding tests. The VR150 gains a few seconds here and loses a couple there, but scores are pretty tight overall.

Image processing

Adobe Photoshop

ACDSee PowerPack

WorldBench’s image processing tasks prove more problematic for the VelociRaptor’s production firmware. The VR150 may only be a few seconds off the pace in ACDSee, but it gets booted from first to last in Photoshop. Even then, the final drive is only 4% slower than the engineering sample.

Multitasking and office applications

Microsoft Office


Mozilla and Windows Media Encoder

The VelociRaptor loses a little more ground in WorldBench’s office and multitasking tests. Scores are still very close across the board, though.

Other applications



Nero and WinZip are the most disk-intensive tests in the WorldBench suite. The early and production VelociRaptors are evenly matched in the former, but the final VR150 manages to extend a bit of a lead in the latter.

Boot and load times
To test system boot and game level load times, we busted out our trusty stopwatch.

Western Digital has managed to shave a little more than half a second off the VelociRaptor’s boot time. Its 3.5″ ancestors are still the fastest of the lot, though.

DOOM 3 load times remain unchanged, but the engineering sample proves a little quicker with Far Cry. Even so, the production VelociRaptor still has a two-second lead over its closest rival.

File Copy Test
File Copy Test is a pseudo-real-world benchmark that times how long it takes to create, read, and copy files in various test patterns. File copying is tested twice: once with the source and target on the same partition, and once with the target on a separate partition. Scores are presented in MB/s.

To make things easier to read, we’ve separated our FC-Test results into individual graphs for each test pattern. We’ll tackle file creation performance first.

VelociRaptor file creation speeds are lower with the production firmware across all five test patterns. The VR150 remains an absolute beast, though.

What the VelociRaptor lost in our file creation tests it gains back when it comes time to read those files. Not only is the VR150 faster than the engineering sample across the board, it’s faster than any other drive we’ve tested.

FC-Test – continued
Next, File Copy Test combines read and write tasks in some, er, copy tests.

The production and engineering sample VelociRaptors are mighty close with FC-Test’s file copy workloads. The final firmware takes four out of five test patterns here, and the VR150 remains the fastest drive in the bunch.

FC-Test’s second wave of copy tests involves copying files from one partition to another on the same drive.

VelociRaptor domination continues when we look at the partition copy results, where finished firmware is just enough to push the VR150 over the top against Samsung’s Spinpoint F1 with the MP3 test pattern.

iPEAK multitasking
We’ve developed a series of disk-intensive multitasking tests to highlight the impact of seek times and command queuing on hard drive performance. You can get the low-down on these iPEAK-based tests here. The mean service time of each drive is reported in milliseconds, with lower values representing better performance.

Although it isn’t the fastest drive with every workload, the production VelociRaptor is consistently quicker than the engineering sample. Again, firmware tweaks allow the VR150 to steal another win from the Spinpoint.

iPEAK multitasking – continued

The VR150 continues to reap the benefits of its final firmware through our second wave of iPEAK workloads. If the VelociRaptors have a preference, it appears to be for multitasking workloads that involve file copy operations.

IOMeter – Transaction rate
IOMeter presents a good test case for both seek times and command queuing.

The VelociRaptor was already a monster in IOMeter, outpacing its predecessor by huge margins under heavy workloads. Final firmware has only made the VR150 more impressive here, particularly under heavier loads.

IOMeter – Response time

The effects of Western Digital’s firmware tuning can be seen when we look at IOMeter response times, which favor the VR150 over our engineering sample. Note that the web server test pattern, which is made up entirely of read operations, remains largely unfazed by the new firmware.

IOMeter – CPU utilization

This one’s a wash, folks.

HD Tach
We tested HD Tach with the benchmark’s full variable zone size setting.

While the VR150’s burst speed is essentially unchanged, WD has managed to squeeze a few more MB/s from the VelociRaptor in HD Tach’s sustained read and write speed drag races.

Random access times have suffered a little, though. Fortunately, the difference is less than half a millisecond.

CPU utilization results are within HD Tach’s +/- 2% margin of error for this test.

Noise levels
Noise levels were measured with an Extech 407727 Digital Sound Level meter 1″ from the side of the drives at idle and under an HD Tach seek load. Drives were run with the PCB facing up.

Firmware tweaks don’t make the VelociRaptor any quieter at idle, where it’s practically silent. Western Digital’s fiddling has lowered the VR150’s noise levels by more than a decibel and a half under a seek load, though. Well done.

Power consumption
For our power consumption tests, we measured the voltage drop across a 0.1-ohm resistor placed in line with the 5V and 12V lines connected to each drive. Through the magic of Ohm’s Law, we were able to calculate the power draw from each voltage rail and add them together for the total power draw of the drive.

The VelociRaptor’s power consumption is marginally lower with its production firmware. That the VR150 manages such dominant performance while drawing so few watts is nothing short of astounding.


Although the production firmware doesn’t improve the VelociRaptor’s performance in each and every test, the final product is faster overall than the engineering sample drive we looked at a couple of months ago. Western Digital has another monster on its hands, and as we’ve seen, a little firmware tweaking can have a big impact. For most users, the VR150’s improved seek noise levels will likely pay the biggest dividends. However, the drive’s substantial performance gains in IOMeter are even more encouraging.

You see, the Raptor started out as an enterprise-class hard drive targeted at servers and workstations before it was embraced by enthusiasts. Western Digital has managed to keep the Raptor attractive to both audiences, and we expect to see a sled-less version of the VelociRaptor designed for enterprise environments before long. The additional performance WD has been able to wring from the VelociRaptor in IOMeter bodes particularly well for the multi-user workloads common in the enterprise world.

In its final form, then, the VelociRaptor VR150 is more than deserving of its Editor’s Choice award. Raptors have never been the best value on the market, and with a $300 street price, the VR150 is no exception. However, like Raptors that have come before, the VelociRaptor is the fastest all-around Serial ATA hard drive you can buy.

Comments closed
    • evermore
    • 11 years ago

    What is this “VR150” you keep referring to? There’s no reference of that name anywhere from WD, just the WD3000GFLS. The only instance of it on their site is in the list of reviews. VR150 isn’t even a useful designation, since it doesn’t indicate the capacity (presumably it refers to one platter).

      • eitje
      • 11 years ago -> storage menu item

      “Western Digital’s VelociRaptor VR150 hard drive”

      • Dissonance
      • 11 years ago

      WD’s press materials for the drive refer to it as the VelociRaptor VR150.

    • RickyTick
    • 11 years ago

    From what I read with my untrained eye, it looks like the WD Caviar 640gb is the overall best option amongst this group of hard drives. jmo

    • albundy
    • 11 years ago

    my hdd buying is at an end. my 1.5 tb is more than enough space for -[

      • indeego
      • 11 years ago

      “Two seconds” saved daily is 12+ minutes saved yearly. It certainly adds upg{<.<}g For someone billing at $500/hour for services, it is a decent idea to get it.. ( or not if they want to bill more hours)

      • muyuubyou
      • 11 years ago

      OS thrashing is in the 10*MBs these days.

      You can close the mplayer/firefox window instead of having your missus seeing your stalled fullscreen pr0n for a full second. 😉

    • jwb
    • 11 years ago

    The MTRON SSD is 20x more expensive on a per-GB comparison, and it’s only about twice as fast as the Raptor. Of course, there are other, much faster SSDs like the FusionIO but they cost even more.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 11 years ago

      Twice as fast measured in what way?

        • MattMojo
        • 11 years ago

        Just dug this up on google -> §[<<]§ The MTRON SSD is quite fast but no where near 20x faster. And at the typical price tag styles for SSDs... I'll pass (hint: $1499 according to that article). SSD of the future: +1 SSD of the here and now: -10 Mojo

    • jwb
    • 11 years ago

    Would be nice if you compared to any other 10k disk. I know they are twice the price, but the Savvio 10k is comparable. According to StorageReview the WD beats the pants off a Savvio 10k.1, but we’re up to 10k.3 now and it’s probably faster.

    • ssidbroadcast
    • 11 years ago

    Nice graphs, Geoff. Thanks guys for listening to reader feedback.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 11 years ago


      • Dissonance
      • 11 years ago


        • MadManOriginal
        • 11 years ago

        ‘ancestors,’ funny, I like the implied dinosaur reference 😀

    • Krogoth
    • 11 years ago

    Raptor dynasty is officially over in the enthusiast ring. There is no point in getting them unless you are building a real server or workstation that needs as low as random access speed as possible.

    Any modern 7200 HDD will work fine for better GB/$$$$ ratio.

    To make Raptor’s fate more solid is that cheaper, faster SSD are looming over horizon posed to render all fast-RPM HDDs obsolete.

      • MattMojo
      • 11 years ago

      I would love to see the day that SSD drives overtake standard HDs in every aspect, but if price is a factor (and it usually is) then that day is a long time away.

      A no moving part + significantly reduced heat and power usage is always a plus in my book.


    • Usacomp2k3
    • 11 years ago

    And heat output can’t be good as well. There’s a reason that this drive has a huge heatsink attached to it that has more surface area than the drive itself.

      • Corrado
      • 11 years ago

      Its there because it needs to fit in a 3.5″ drive bay. No other reason. I think it was Dan’s Data that did tests and it ran perfectly fine, and consumed only SLIGHTLY more power than a typical 2.5″ drive and consumed slightly less than a typical 3.5″ drive.

      • Saribro
      • 11 years ago

      The heatsink is for show, It barely makes any useful contact to the drive for heat-transport anyway.

        • Usacomp2k3
        • 11 years ago

        I’m not disagree about the usefulness of the heatsink, but your insight is slightly flawed. There is twice as much contact as on the heatspreader of a CPU, and surely you don’t call that minimal, do you 😉

          • Voldenuit
          • 11 years ago

          spcr found that the “heatsink” adversely affected the acoustics of the velociraptor.

          With the heatsink on, the drive was middling in terms of quietness. Without the heatsink, it was one of the quiestest drives they had tested.

          • eitje
          • 11 years ago

          8W versus 80W – there’s a difference.

          • Saribro
          • 11 years ago

          Except that on a CPU, it’s actually contacting the heatsource…
          You know, “useful” contact.

      • mboza
      • 11 years ago

      The heat output can only be the same as the power consumption, which is a couple of watts better than most of the competition.

      I would like to see a couple of solid state drives tested, but the GB/$ is not there yet for me.

      • Hance
      • 11 years ago

      The reason it has a huge heat sink attached to it is to make it fit in a 3.5 inch bay. Yes it draws more power than your average 2.5 inch drive §[<<]§ but it spins at 10k rpms it has to. Give me 10k rpms and use a couple of more watts its worth it to me.

      • ludi
      • 11 years ago

      Run the numbers, they’re printed right there on the drive. 5V @ 0.95A and 12V @ 0.30A are the drive’s maximum ratings. By the Ohm’s law expression for power, P=V*I, we can do this: 5*0.95+12*0.30 = 8.35W, assuming the drive is running flat out.

      I’ve got 5-year warranted Seagate Barracuda 7200.xx series drives with similar figures printed on their own hoods, and those do just fine using only their 3.5″ frames for heatsinking. This here is 2.5″, so it will have less surface area and probably benefit from a small heatsinking addition, but most of the Raptor sink is just bling. It doesn’t cost much relative to the drive, it looks slick, it adds weight, and it therefore helps convince people to part with $300.

        • TravelMug
        • 11 years ago

        What he said.

    • hermanshermit
    • 11 years ago

    The Raptors place in the sun will be short lived, check out the performance from the latest SSDs such as the Mobi 3000.

      • Fighterpilot
      • 11 years ago

      Aren’t they really expensive for similar capacity?

    • Hamish
    • 11 years ago

    The Velociraptor was on my list for my next gaming rig build before this article, and afterwards, it’s staying there. 🙂

      • preyingrazor
      • 11 years ago

      It’s certainly on my new gaming rig 😉

      §[<<]§ The hard drive will prove to be the biggest bottleneck on my rig, so it only makes sense to use the best. Where I've spent loads of money on crossfire, motherboards, processors and 4 GB DDR3 RAM, I'd rather buy this as well so that the rest of the system can realize it's full potential.

    • Hance
    • 11 years ago

    Now if western digital will put the drive on a diet so I can cram one in my laptop i will be really happy. If my ages old raptor 74 dies I know what drive I will be picking up.

      • UberGerbil
      • 11 years ago

      As long as you aren’t interested in battery life. Typical 2.5″ notebook drives (even 7200rpm) consume 1W or less at idle, and 3W or less during seeks. That’s 3-4x less than the velociraptor.

        • Hance
        • 11 years ago

        Nope I dont care about that. I have a 2.1ghz c2d, 7900 GTX, 2 gigs of ram, 17 inch screen. A faster hard drive would be welcome i dont care about battery life or heat.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This