Hard Drive Temperatures, too hot?

[CoW]8(0)]

I've been checking the HD temp of my Maxtor drive and according to everest it's 53C.

This seems a bit high, but is it?

 

[Asian Dub Foundation]

yes the is quiet high

 

[drizzt81]

if your HDD is seriously at 53C that is pretty hot.

 

[DougLite]

<30C: possible, great if you can get there, but not absolutely necessary
30-40C: pretty good, this should be your goal. Most drives will run happily for years in this temperature range.
40-50C: Not so good. Installing a modest fan (or moderate upgrade in fan size speed for one already present) in the area of the drive(s) should get you below 40.
50-60C: Bad. The reliability of drives operating in this temperature range is reduced significantly. Drives operating in this range require significant cooling upgrades, such as a new case, significantly larger and/or faster fans or other major actions to address cooling deficiencies.
>60C: Imminent failure.

 

[Farva]

<30C: possible, great if you can get there, but not absolutely necessary
30-40C: pretty good, this should be your goal. Most drives will run happily for years in this temperature range.
40-50C: Not so good. Installing a modest fan (or moderate upgrade in fan size speed for one already present) in the area of the drive(s) should get you below 40.
50-60C: Bad. The reliability of drives operating in this temperature range is reduced significantly. Drives operating in this range require significant cooling upgrades, such as a new case, significantly larger and/or faster fans or other major actions to address cooling deficiencies.
>60C: Imminent failure.

speaking of temperatures, how do you exactly test this on your own machine?

 

[drizzt81]

speaking of temperatures, how do you exactly test this on your own machine?

Speedfan is an option I believe. Otherwise, some smart tools can read it too.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

I'm not sure why my Maxtor runs about 10C hotter than my WD drive. Both are 160GB 7200RPM with 8MB cache and mounted in the same place.

The Maxtor is a SATA while the WD is a PATA.

Is there any difference in using the Maxtor's molex connector rather than it's SATA power connector?

 

[Asian Dub Foundation]

I'm not sure why my Maxtor runs about 10C hotter than my WD drive. Both are 160GB 7200RPM with 8MB cache and mounted in the same place.

The Maxtor is a SATA while the WD is a PATA.

Is there any difference in using the Maxtor's molex connector rather than it's SATA power connector?

none. is the maxtor your boot drive? might be causing it to be hotter

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Nope, the WD is the boot drive, the maxtor is an empty drive for now...

 

[DougLite]

I'm not sure why my Maxtor runs about 10C hotter than my WD drive. Both are 160GB 7200RPM with 8MB cache and mounted in the same place.

The Maxtor is a SATA while the WD is a PATA.

Is there any difference in using the Maxtor's molex connector rather than it's SATA power connector?

Maxtor drives always run hotter, as they draw more power. Simple science from there. You're observation that the drives are same is correct, and the extra power drawn by a Maxtor drive has to go somewhere, and it's dissipated as heat.

Check out the environmental data at the bottom of this comparison. You'll see the Maxtor pulling significantly more power than all of the compared drives.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

So basically Maxtor drives are less efficient than drives by Western Digital etc?

 

[drizzt81]

So basically Maxtor drives are less efficient than drives by Western Digital etc?

it depends what efficiency you are talking about.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Well the ratio of the work performed over the energy consumed is lower than my WD drive. In fact, according to HDTach my WD PATA drive outperforms my Maxtor SATA drive.

 

[E4g1e]

Well the ratio of the work performed over the energy consumed is lower than my WD drive. In fact, according to HDTach my WD PATA drive outperforms my Maxtor SATA drive.

Well, the recent Maxtor ATA drives - both PATA and SATA - have NEVER been renowned for their transfer-rate or seek performance. In fact, they tend to produce lower maximum sequential transfer rates (on the outer edges of the platters) than most hard drives of their corresponding generations, while their seek performance is merely middling for their RPM class. In short, there are better drives than that particular Maxtor (PATA or SATA), even in the 160GB/8MB class.

Seagate, on the other hand, has a recent reputation for producing drives which excel in top maximum sequential transfer rate but with mediocre seek performance...

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Interesting.

Also, out of curiosity is HDTach benchmark affected when the hard drive has data or partitions on it? Because when I compared the performance, my WD drive had 2 partitions and a bit of data while the Maxtor drive was just formatted.

 

[E4g1e]

Interesting.

Also, out of curiosity is HDTach benchmark affected when the hard drive has data or partitions on it? Because when I compared the performance, my WD drive had 2 partitions and a bit of data while the Maxtor drive was just formatted.

The HDTach benchmark is affected by partitioning, as well. When you ran HDTach on your WD drive, you've tested only the boot partition of that drive. Hard drive benchmarking tools only work on one partition at a time.