Blackstone
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,583
What do you guys think is the best overall 1TB desktop drive on the market?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
not to steal the thread, but can someone answer me a question on these 1TB drives? which would be good for just storing games, music, ect.?
The general consensus around here on performance:
1. Caviar Black
2. Samsung F1
3. Hitachi 7K1000.B
4. Seagate 7200.12
Cool and quiet:
1. Samsung EcoGreen F2
2. Caviar Green
3. Seagate Barracuda LP
# hdparm -Tt /dev/sda
Timing cached reads: 14765 MB in 2.00 seconds = 7382.33 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 367 MB in 3.01 seconds = 121.82 MB/sec
# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdb
Timing cached reads: 12991 MB in 2.00 seconds = 6495.33 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 308 MB in 3.01 seconds = 102.33 MB/sec
I'll agree that the 7200.12 delivers great linear transfer performance, but Seagate drives have faltered for several generations now on seek performance and buffer strategy. I'd still pick WD Caviar Black, Samsung F1, or Hitachi 7K1000.B for random access performance on the desktop (booting OS, loading programs, games, etc)+1 for the Seagate 7200.12 drive. 2x500 gig platters beats 3x333 platters. That said, I also have a WD Black which I use as a backup drive/main system is on the Seagate. The Seagate runs about 5-6 C cooler and is a bit quicker in the benchmarks. Idle temp: 32 C (room temp is 78 F) which is a full 6 degrees cooler than my other 1 TB WD1001FALS HDD which idles around 38 C. Both drives are in the same case behind the same 120mm fan literally side-by-side.
Comparing this to my other 1TB drive, a WD1001FALS (WD Black 7200 RPM/32 Meg cache with 3x333 platters) using hdparm under Linux x86_64, the Seagate drive is a bit quicker. Here are the results, first the Seagate (results are averaged of three runs):
Code:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sda Timing cached reads: 14765 MB in 2.00 seconds = 7382.33 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 367 MB in 3.01 seconds = 121.82 MB/sec
Now the WD drive (results are averaged of three runs):
Code:# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdb Timing cached reads: 12991 MB in 2.00 seconds = 6495.33 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 308 MB in 3.01 seconds = 102.33 MB/sec
So roughly 14 % faster on the cached reads and 19 % faster on the buffered reads.
BTW, I have several .11 Seagates that were affected in that firmware issue that are 100 % fine (two 640's and one 750).
I've always been under the impression that seek time/random access times were the most important statistic.