Fastest 7200rpm drive atm?

[jmet]

I am looking to replace my old Seagate "7200.10" 320 gig drives in Raid0 with something faster. I am not looking to spend allot and do not need a ton of room so I would like to stick close to 500 gig drives. My choices so far from the research I have done are below, please advise between these two or add whatever I may have missed.



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148395
(Seems to have received allot attention lately, my understanding is that it is a great performer but perhaps not the barn burner some were hoping for.)

or

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319
(The old champ in this category or still the champ compared to the above?)

[Digital Viper-X-]

7200.12? pretty fast :)

[jmet]

7200.12? pretty fast :)

The Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST3500418AS 500GB as linked above on Newegg yes, it seems to be the most likely choice but confirming before I place the order.

[-=Antimatter=-]

WD 640GB Black would be my guess, 320GB platters and all

[jmet]

WD 640GB Black would be my guess, 320GB platters and all

It was my understanding that the Seagate has a single 500 gig platter.

[dandragonrage]

7K1000.B

[jmet]

Just to clarify, the new drives will also be run as a Raid 0.

[BlueFireIce]

Last I saw the ST3500418AS had slower access times than the WD6401AALS drives, so do you want better access times or a few more MB/s in throughput?

[jmet]

Last I saw the ST3500418AS had slower access times than the WD6401AALS drives, so do you want better access times or a few more MB/s in throughput?


As my main performance concern is gaming, specifically MMO's I would assume throughput would be more important in regards to loading large textures.

[InvisiBill]

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1387801 has some HD Tune numbers for the ST3500410AS and I put some WD6401AALS numbers up at http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1412585. My numbers show lower access times and lower transfer rates, like BlueFireIce said. Note that my tests were run in BartPE rather than a full Windows installation. I'm not sure if that affects the numbers at all (it was designed as a comparison between the three drives I had, nothing more).

My 500GB 7200.10 has been fine, but all the firmware issues on the .11's kind of scared me away from Seagate.

[Digital Viper-X-]

As my main performance concern is gaming, specifically MMO's I would assume throughput would be more important in regards to loading large textures.

that's backwards

MMOS are better off iwth faster access time as they load many small textures / files :)

^^ I have tested this! grab a pair of ocz vertex 30s and your mmo will feel like a new game

[jmet]

I have decided to go with the WD Black for the lower access times (SSD is too expensive atm) and to avoid the possible Seagate issues, which is painful to a degree as I have been using nothing but Seagate for years now. :)

[dandragonrage]

Not a bad choice, but the 7k1000.B is faster. Oh well. Too many WD and Seagate "fanboys" around here.

[jmet]

Not a bad choice, but the 7k1000.B is faster. Oh well. Too many WD and Seagate "fanboys" around here.

Link me some benchmarks or reviews that compare this drive with the 640 gig WD Black? The one I looked at showed that it had much slower access times and slightly faster throughput.

[dandragonrage]

StorageReview has the WD Black 1TB, which is the same speed, and tests the E7k1000 version of the Hitachi, which they claim is 3-platter, which would be the same as the 7k1000.B

[vista_blista]

Newegg just placed the 500GBx2 platter drive Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST31000528AS 1TB 7200RPM 32MB Cache up for sale, $99 with free shipping.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148433&nm_mc=OTC-C173T&cm_mmc=OTC-C173T-_-Hard+Drives-_-Seagate-_-22148433

Although the way these 7200.12 series drives are testing, they seem to be mild disappointments in regards to speed. I'm especially not too sure about trusting Seagate's reliability and recent track record, enough to play guinea pig. :)

Some reviews:
http://www.xcpus.com/reviews/137-Seagate-Barracuda-720012-1TB-Drive-Review-ST31000528AS-Page-1.aspx

http://www.techtree.com/India/Reviews/Seagate_Barracuda_720012_ST31000528AS_1TB/551-101336-632.html

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2009/04/13/seagate-1tb-7200-12-review/1

http://www.bigbruin.com/content/barracuda1tb_1

http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1526

[davewolfs]

The seagate stinks for write performance.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16472

I'd go with WD especially after Seagates firmware fiasco.

[dandragonrage]

Note that that review tested the old 5-platter Hitachi. The 3-platter is better.

[haffey]

Newegg just placed the 500GBx2 platter drive Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST31000528AS 1TB 7200RPM 32MB Cache up for sale, $99 with free shipping.
That looks like a great contender to the Samsung F1 1TB. I might just have to jump on that. I'm willing to play guinea pig as long as I have an image of my old install lying around. ;)

[vista_blista]

Tom's Hardware has some pretty great articles of late.... including this 500GB platter drive roundup. The latest Samsung F2, Seagate Barracuda 7200.12, the Western Digital WD20EADS and WD10EADS, all tested.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2tb-hdd-caviar,2261.html

[davewolfs]

Tom also said that the 2TB drive is loud, I take their reviews with a grain of salt.

[jmet]

I ordered three of the 640 gig WD Blacks, I might run two of them as Raid 0 and use the third in another computer but am considering running all three drives as raid 0. I understand the added likelihood of failure the more drives one uses in Raid 0 and have sufficient backup plans already in place.

Either way I am pondering short stroking (luls) for the first time, perhaps a 200-300 gig short stroked raid 0 then use the rest for my user folder (docs/pictures/music etc.).

[InvisiBill]

I ordered three of the 640 gig WD Blacks, I might run two of them as Raid 0 and use the third in another computer but am considering running all three drives as raid 0. I understand the added likelihood of failure the more drives one uses in Raid 0 and have sufficient backup plans already in place.

Either way I am pondering short stroking (luls) for the first time, perhaps a 200-300 gig short stroked raid 0 then use the rest for my user folder (docs/pictures/music etc.).

In my HD Tune testing, the first 10% is definitely the fastest, and the next 10% is pretty close. The first 100GB (or less) of each drive should make for a pretty quick RAID0 setup.

You may not want to put your whole user profile directory on a separate partition. Windows does access a lot of files in your profile, so moving the whole thing to another partition will cause it to have to jump back and forth to go between the OS data and the profile data. You'd probably want to go with C:\Users\jmet\, then redirect just the file storage folders to another partition (D:\Users\jmet\My Documents\, etc.). This will keep the big media files from eating up all the space on your quick disk, while still keeping the frequently accessed profile stuff there. If you make a custom unattended install, you should be able to set this during Setup, rather than having to adjust everything afterwards.

[jmet]

In my HD Tune testing, the first 10% is definitely the fastest, and the next 10% is pretty close. The first 100GB (or less) of each drive should make for a pretty quick RAID0 setup.

You may not want to put your whole user profile directory on a separate partition. Windows does access a lot of files in your profile, so moving the whole thing to another partition will cause it to have to jump back and forth to go between the OS data and the profile data. You'd probably want to go with C:\Users\jmet\, then redirect just the file storage folders to another partition (D:\Users\jmet\My Documents\, etc.). This will keep the big media files from eating up all the space on your quick disk, while still keeping the frequently accessed profile stuff there. If you make a custom unattended install, you should be able to set this during Setup, rather than having to adjust everything afterwards.

Yeah that is what I meant, can anyone point me to a guide on how to properly short stroke using Raid 0? I have done some reading but want to make sure I am doing everything right.

[vista_blista]

Tom also said that the 2TB drive is loud, I take their reviews with a grain of salt.

The perception of sound is subjective. However the drive does have four platters. I try to avoid drives with more than three. Noise and heat are introduced in linear layers. Some might call into question Tom's measurements, which aren't taken from a great distance. I see no problem with the testing though. I also appreciated the I/O tests.

Actually, Tom's gets a bad rap, even though they've improved a lot. They have increased awareness of short-stroking. They have been generally more informed about SSD technology etc. I actually trust Anand a lot less. He's too busy trying to make a name for himself, and take undeserved credit.

[davewolfs]

Read the techreport review. Its a lot more thorough then Tom's. Also check out the 2TB review on silentpcreview.com, it's far from being a noisy drive 4 platter or not. It's the quietest drive they have ever tested.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16472