Hard drives - Biggest, Fastest, Cheapest

[VirusType2]

Well, I bought a 500GB Western Digital Caviar 16 Hard drive a month or two ago, and I've been putting it through a grueling test.

I keep my room at about 81 degrees Farenheit (My Lizard likes it hot, and I like it warm), and I've had the drive working for the entire time I've owned it without turning it off, 24 hours a day. I've been downloading old TV shows and other rare media constantly. I guess about a month and a half it's been working with constant reads/writes. I'm sure my Antec 900 case with it's hard drive fans and great ventilation helps quite a bit.

This drive is great, and I wanted to take this time to recommend it.


I need another drive, since I want to put a few hundred CD's of mine onto my computer (whats left of them - damn scratches) I also want to put all my old VHS tapes and rare audio Cassettes onto it.

I need another drive, at least as good as the one I've got.

Are there any new drives out there, or anything better for the money?

I saw that Samsung has a relatively new 500GB drive out, and it's a bit cheaper. I couldn't find a comparison though.


Anyone have any recommendations? Otherwise I'll just order another WD 500 Caviar 16.

Thanks.

 

[Geogaddi]

I have one of those. It owns.

 

[The Brick]

I have two 3200KS caviar se16 drives, perfectly happy with them. Quiet, fast and reliable. And a good price too. I'd say get another 500gb drive like the one you have.

 

[VirusType2]

I guess I bothered posting because I'm afraid as soon as I buy another one of these drives, the 700+ MB or 1 TB drives will be affordable.

Anyone know anything about imminent price drops, or faster HD's?


EDIT:

I'd say get another 500gb drive like the one you have.

Yeah, I've been ready to order for a couple weeks, but have been holding out in case something better (bigger and/or faster) comes along.

I'll probably just go ahead and order one when I get home from work, if not before work tonight.

 

[Link]

Custom PC did a mega test a few months back, and the new spinpoints from samsung perform amazingly. Better than a 10,000k raptor in some bench tests

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/custompc/labs/45/hard-drives---500gb/introduction.html

 

[Asus]

I have 2 different 500GB WD models (one is the same as yours) and they work great. Constantly recording to one of them and reading+writing to the other when doing commercial edits and downloads. But I bought the SE16 one for close to $300 a while back.

If you NEED more space then grit your teeth and buy a big drive at their current price. After I bought my first 500GB then they were 200...then 150 etc. Then I got another, the new model, for a nice price.

Seagate, Samsung + Hitachi 1TB MSRP $400
WD 750GB $250

Although Samsung isn't exactly known for reliable HDDs, just quiet ones.

 

[VirusType2]

Custom PC did a mega test a few months back, and the new spinpoints from samsung perform amazingly. Better than a 10,000k raptor in some bench tests

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/custompc/labs/45/hard-drives---500gb/introduction.html

Yeah, that's why I wanted to read a review of it before I got another WD. Samsung is one of my favorites - Rather, Samsung is my favorite, so they deserved a look.

I just read this,

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd has just been named as the number one consumer electronics brand in the world*

can't figure out who says though.

Samsung has just been named as the number one consumer electronics brand in the world* and is an acknowledged leader in the digital convergence revolution. Since its inception in 1969, Samsung has successfully transitioned from an analogue driven product line to a cutting-edge and award-winning digital innovator that is currently the world's number one manufacturer of CDMA mobile phones, LCD and CRT monitors, DRAM memory chips and microwave ovens. With worldwide electronic product sales of $US36.9 billion, over 75,000 employees and a global network in 47 countries, Samsung is truly a global giant and has been recognised as one of the world's top 100 Brands by BusinessWeek magazine.

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductInfo.asp?WebProductID=494552

 

[WhiteZero]

Seagate Barracudas are just about the fastest SATA hard drives next to the WD Raptors

 

[Asus]

They are talking about the samsung brand overall which is way too broad. But what matters is the samsung hard drive brand, or better yet a specific hard drive model in question.

Just my observations from reading other's experiences on tech forums and partly my own opinions. Pretty general, doesn't refer to any specific model nor cover every model.
Reliability: Seagate WD
Performance: WD Seagate Hitachi
Quiet: Samsung WD

 

[VirusType2]

Here is a comparison of details as best I could find:

(I own this one)

Western Digital Caviar SE 16 WD5000AAKS 500GB 7200RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s

Rotational Speed
7,200 RPM (nominal)
Buffer Size
16 MB
Average Latency
4.20 ms (nominal)
Contact Start/Stop Cycles
50,000 minimum

Seek Times:
Read Seek Time 8.9 ms
Write Seek Time 10.9 ms (average)
Track-To-Track Seek Time 2.0 ms (average)
Full Stroke Seek 21.0 ms (average)
Transfer Rates:
Buffer To Host (Serial ATA) 300 MB/s (Max)
Buffer To Disk 748 Mbits/s (Max)
Physical Specifications Formatted Capacity 500,107 MB
Capacity 500 GB
Interface SATA 300 MB/s
User Sectors Per Drive 976,773,168
Physical Dimensions Height 1.028 Inches (Max)
Length 5.787 Inches (Max)
Width 4.00 Inches (+/- 0.010 inch)
Weight 1.32 Pounds


500GB Samsung HD501LJ Spinpoint T, SATA300, 7200 RPM, 16MB Cache, 8.9 ms, NCQ - OEM


Technical Details:

* Average latency 4.17 ms
* Average seek time 8.9 ms
* Buffer size 16Mbytes
* Bytes per sector 512 bytes
* Component design life (min) 5 years
* Dimensions 1 in. (H) x 4 in. (W) x 5.75 in. (D)
* Full stroke seek 18 ms
* Interface type Serial ATA II 3.0Gbps
* Mtbf 40000 Hours
* Nonrecoverable read errors per bits read 1 per 10^14
* Rotation speed 7200rpm
* Track to track seek time 0.8 ms
* Transfer rates - buffer to host 135Mbytes/s
* Transfer rates - buffer to host (serial ata) 300 MB/s (Max)
* Voltage +5V?5%,+12V?10%

Features:

* Up to 167GB Formatted Capacity per Disk
* Serial ATA 3.0 Gbps Interface Support
* SATA Native Command Queuing Feature
* Device Initiated SATA Power Management
* Staggerd Spin-up Support
* High Speed Dual DSP Based Architecture
* ATA S.M.A.R.T Compliant
* ATA Automatic Acoustic Management Feature
* ATA 48-bit Address Feature
* ATA Streaming Feature(Optional)
* ATA Device Configuration Overlay Feature
* SilentSeek
* ImpacGuard

I think the WD uses less power.

It seems to me the samsung is faster, quieter, and has a 5 year warranty. It's about $12 more.

Am I reading this right? The average seek time (read/write combined?) of the samsung is as low as the fastest seek time (read) for the WD, and the Samsung Track to Track seek time is more than twice as fast?

Also, the transfer rates of the two drives are listed differently.

Samsung -----Transfer rates - buffer to host 135Mbytes/s

WD ----------Buffer To Disk 748 Mbits/s (Max)

What is faster 135 Megabytes or 748 Megabits. 135 Megabytes?
Would like some confirmation, I needed to order one a couple of weeks ago.

 

[Asus]

What matters are not specs on paper but actual events. Benchmarks of actual uses for the drives and see what is faster. Have a lot of people use a drive for 3 years and get feedback to see what percentage have had their drive fail.

The HD400LJ (400GB drive) has the same specs, especially what you put in bold.
Here it is in a review.
(Yes, the reviewed model has 16MB cache)

 

[VirusType2]

What matters are not specs on paper but actual events. Benchmarks of actual uses for the drives and see what is faster. Have a lot of people use a drive for 3 years and get feedback to see what percentage have their drive fail.

The HD400LJ (400GB drive) has the same specs, especially what you put in bold.
Here is it in a review.

lol. I dont' have 3 years. I don't even have 3 days.

Personally, I've never had a hard drive fail, so I'm a little trusting. In my experience, it's best to go with what you have had good experience with, but if it's faster and quieter, i'm willing to jump ship.

The Samsung is said to be fast as balls. Even faster than the WD, which is already fast as hell.

They said it only takes a second and a half to load Paint Shop Pro, an application that I own. Currently, (I just tested this as I type) it takes 14 seconds to load this application on my WD 500 Caviar 16.

That would make the samsung more than 9 times faster at loading programs?!

Also, the 400 is not the same as the 500

However, this isn't nearly as easy as it looks, despite hard disks being marketed as members of a series. This is because, despite often having similar model names, there's frequently little commonality between two drives from the same series. For example, the Hitachi Deskstar T7K500 series comprises 12 models, which span two different interfaces (EIDE and S-ATA II), four different capacities (250, 320, 400 and 500GB) and two buffer sizes (8MB and 16MB). To further complicate matters, drives with different capacities also have different areal and track densities, which have a massive effect on performance.

Besides the different platter size, the one you link to only has a 8 MB buffer.

 

[Asus]

They JUST released the 1TB Samsung hard drive. Who else has it reviewed?
I just wouldn't go by marketing words and no reviews.

Also, the 400 is not the same as the 500

So the specs page all match which you quoted. Yet the platters and therefore performance are different.
So...that proves the point that specs don't matter?
"Hello McFly"

hehe I'm sorry. I had to say it.

Also, look at their test notes page which lists the hard drive used for the review.
Cache Size = 16MB
I made mention to the discrepancy between the review and the specs listed from the Samsung link.

 

[VirusType2]

They JUST released the 1TB Samsung hard drive. Who else has it reviewed?

Not sure what you are saying; I'm not looking at the 1 TB models, since they don't have a good price/size ratio.

I just wouldn't go by marketing words and no reviews.


So...that proves the point that specs don't matter?

Possibly, although the one you linked to only has an 8 MB buffer

so, come on Asus, all specs aside, what drive would you buy? did you check out the review of the actual drives in comparison? Link posted a... link.

 

[Asus]

Possibly, although the one you linked to only has an 8 MB buffer

Also, look at their test notes page which lists the hard drive used for the review.
Cache Size = 16MB
I made mention to the discrepancy between the review and the specs listed from the Samsung link.

The tech report review states that there are 8MB and 16MB varieties of that model.

so, come on Asus, all specs aside, what drive would you buy? did you check out the review of the actual drives in comparison? Link posted a... link.

I went there but I didn't see any chart, graphs or any display of information regarding benchmarks. Just 3 tabs going to Intro, etc.

edit:I just found a review at Storagereview.com
On the Access time and transfer rate page, read the "Some Perspective" paragraph at the bottom.

For performance? The Hitachi 500GB wins on that review. The WD and Samsung go back and forth on the games page (with the Hitachi on top). And at the end where it talks about reliability of the drive in question (Samsung)...the percentages have not come in yet because it is relatively new still. D:

If I bought a 500GB right now I'd buy either a Seagate or WD. I don't trust Hitachi drives for reliability (deskstar brand).
Plus 1 or 2 reviews is not enough for me. Another site could show things differently. Just like GPUs or CPUs. Using a different test or same test but different settings.

 

[VirusType2]

The tech report review states that there are 8MB and 16MB varieties of that model.



I went there but I didn't see any chart, graphs or any display of information regarding benchmarks. Just 3 tabs going to Intro, etc.

edit:I just found a review at Storagereview.com
On the Access time and transfer rate page, read the "Some Perspective" paragraph at the bottom.

For performance? The Hitachi 500GB wins on that review. The WD and Samsung go back and forth on the games page (with the Hitachi on top). And at the end where it talks about reliability of the drive in question (Samsung)...the percentages have not come in yet because it is relatively new still. D:

If I bought a 500GB right now I'd buy either a Seagate or WD. I don't trust Hitachi drives for reliability (deskstar brand).
Plus 1 or 2 reviews is not enough for me. Another site could show things differently. Just like GPUs or CPUs. Using a different test or same test but different settings.

From that review, it looks like the Hitachi deskstar is the best drive out there. Do you think I should get one of those instead of the WD?

 

[DEATHMASTER]

I recently got a 400gb western digital off of ebay for $76. Works well with Vista and rest of system.