• A Great friend to the HardForum with a great kid that he is trying to get a scholorship to continue his schooling. Please give hime a vote! Only 24 hours left! Thanks.
    If you have an VOTE FOR KEENAN!

Do # of platters & heads effect reliability?

K

Karma

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 1, 2004
Messages
488
I'm thinking of getting a 7200.8 250GB or a 300GB (either is fine), but want to get the one with the least number of platters, just to increase reliability.

But, am I just paranoid? Do the number of platters & heads in a HD make a difference? (at least in the 7200.8's?)
 
Seagate and others seem to think so. Only recently did they release a drive with more than two platters. Having more platters and heads increases the number of mechanical parts, and a good deal of hard drive failures are due to mechanical failure. If reliability really concerns you, then yes, I think your logic is reasonable.
 
I couldn't find the number of platters/heads for the 7200.8's on Seagates website.

Anyone know where I can find them?
 
K.I.S.S.

(Keep it simple stupid) a basic and pervasive engineering maxim
every level of complexity added increases at least the potential
not that engineering cant often brilliantly overcome that

with fluid dynamic bearing motors I really wouldnt be too concerned
 
Don't scsi drives typically have more read/write heads than IDE drives, same with platters?
 
I found that each 7200.8 has 133GB per platter, so they all have 3 platters each.

No idea how many heads they got, though.

I just bought the 250GB 7200.8 from newegg w/ overnight shipping. I should get it Monday/Tues.

Honestly, 250GB is huge for me. I never store videos, & the biggest files I have are my MP3's (~9 GB). In a few months I'm getting a 74GB Raptor to replace my "old" 36GB Raptor for the OS & games.

cool beans! :)
 
My bad. The 250GB version has 2 platters, while the 300 & 400 versions have 3 platters.

I'm glad I got the 250GB one.
 
This is precisely the reason why only Hitachi is brave enough to market a five platter drive (7K400 and 7K500), and is also a very good reason why 7K400 is more expensive per GB than 7K250 despite the same desnity per platter. The more platters, and particularly more actuator arms, increase design complexity and require additional attention in design and higher quality components to keep reliability at the same level as a drive with fewer platters.

7200.7 is max of 2 platter, as are all Samsung drives.
As already mentioned, 7200.8 is a max of three platters
WD, Maxtor, and Hitachi 7K250 7200 drives are 1 platter for 80GB drives, 2 platter for 120 and 160, and three platter for 200 and 250.
Raptor is 1 or 2, depending on which size.
SCSI drives are 1, 2 or 4., once again depending on capacity.

Everest Home Edition will tell you most everything, including platter count on your HD, in the Storage\ATA section.
 
Yes the number of platters and heads affect reliability. The more moving parts, the more there is to break. ;)
 
SirKenin said:
Yes the number of platters and heads affect reliability. The more moving parts, the more there is to break. ;)
Click to expand...

This does make a little sense... but, hard drives are supposed to make millions of read/write cycles in a lifetime. Manufacturers design them to last for a very long time, and some also offer a 5 year warranty.

According to your logic, 8 cylinder engines are less reliable than 4 cylinder engines, since a V8 has twice as many cylinders, twice the fuel injectors, a bigger distributor, etc... But, how many small-block V8s are still on the road after 30 years?

As hard drive capacity grows, they are increasing platter density while sometimes reducing the number of platters. That kinda scares me too... after all, how much more data can they cram onto a 3.5" platter? We're gonna hit a physical barrier soon.

I personally won't let the number of patters affect my buying decision. If I want a 300gb or 400gb drive, I'm gonna have to be satisfied with 3 platters. I'd rather have one 400gb hard drive with 3 platters than two 200gb drives with a total of 4 platters in 2 separate drives!
 
MScrip said:
According to your logic, 8 cylinder engines are less reliable than 4 cylinder engines, since a V8 has twice as many cylinders, twice the fuel injectors, a bigger distributor, etc... But, how many small-block V8s are still on the road after 30 years?
Click to expand...
If anything, it's the average 4-cylinder engine that's less reliable than the average 8-cylinder engine - because the typical 4-cylinder engine must rev much higher than the typical 8-cylinder engine just to even go slow; that, in turn, is caused by the relatively small displacement of most 4-cylinder engines compared to even the "smallest" 8-cylinder engine.
 
As hard drive capacity grows, they are increasing platter density while sometimes reducing the number of platters. That kinda scares me too... after all, how much more data can they cram onto a 3.5" platter? We're gonna hit a physical barrier soon.
Click to expand...

get perpendicular
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top