• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

NEED a quick Recommendation for a Storage HD....

S

StalkerZER0

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
1,207
I'm at work and bored. :(
I'm thinkin bout taking a walk over to JandR and buying a large capacity storage drive. I'm looking for a 500 GB internal SATA drive with a 16mb cache. Which is the best one out there? Seagate? WD?
Lemme know quick? Cause I wanna go soon.
 
Wow, that's pretty bored :p I like Maxtor's DiamondMax 11/Maxline Pro 500s, or Seagate's 7200.10. Either are fairly fast, but the Maxtor is a little hotter and a little faster. As long as you've got proper cooling either will be okay.

 
You have to decide what parameters are most important to you. Speed, noise, heat, power, reliability? In any case, check out SR's roundup of 500GB disks. They're reviewing all nearline drives, which you don't really need for desktop stuff and in some cases (WD!) aren't appropriate for single-disk, desktop systems.

 
Yeah but they actually recommended the WD 500GB over the 750GB seagate for single user usage. Right?

But that was comparing two 7200.10 drives. What I want to know is how does the WD 7200.10 500GB drive compare to the.........wait.
First of all, does seagate have a 7200.10 500GB hard drive?
 
Yes. And that SR link wasn't comparing the 750GB 7200.10 to anything, just 500GB disks from Seagate, Maxtor, and WD.

StorageReview did indeed place WD at the top of its list. However, they're looking at mid-enterprise stuff here - for single-disk, desktop usage, RE drives are unsuitable, but they're necessary for RAID environments which servers use. The WD5000KS would be the disk you'd want, not the WD5000YR.

 
unhappy_mage said:
Yes. And that SR link wasn't comparing the 750GB 7200.10 to anything, just 500GB disks from Seagate, Maxtor, and WD.

StorageReview did indeed place WD at the top of its list. However, they're looking at mid-enterprise stuff here - for single-disk, desktop usage, RE drives are unsuitable, but they're necessary for RAID environments which servers use. The WD5000KS would be the disk you'd want, not the WD5000YR.

Click to expand...

That would be this one here at this link right?? :
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7821967&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat33200050001&id=1142294266760
 
unhappy_mage said:
Yes. And that SR link wasn't comparing the 750GB 7200.10 to anything, just 500GB disks from Seagate, Maxtor, and WD.

StorageReview did indeed place WD at the top of its list. However, they're looking at mid-enterprise stuff here - for single-disk, desktop usage, RE drives are unsuitable, but they're necessary for RAID environments which servers use. The WD5000KS would be the disk you'd want, not the WD5000YR.

Click to expand...

Also, whether it be the KS or YS would you recommend the WD 500GB 7200.10 over the seagate 500GB? I don't care about the seagate 5 year warranty by the way. 3 years from now I would probably upgrade anyway.

And, how do you know that seagate link u gave me was for the 7200.10 version? I went to the seagate site and it seems not even THEY know. Their product info is so confusing.
 
StalkerZER0 said:
That would be this one here at this link right?? :
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7821967&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat33200050001&id=1142294266760
Click to expand...
That is the WD5000KS retail pack, yes. It'd be helpful if you cut out just the part of the quote relevant to your answer so I didn't spend a minute wondering why you were asking if a WD drive was the same as a Seagate :p
StalkerZER0 said:
Also, whether it be the KS or YS would you recommend the WD 500GB 7200.10 over the seagate 500GB? I don't care about the seagate 5 year warranty by the way. 3 years from now I would probably upgrade anyway.

And, how do you know that seagate link u gave me was for the 7200.10 version? I went to the seagate site and it seems not even THEY know. Their product info is so confusing.
Click to expand...
The KS would be the recommended WD drive, but I'd personally go with the Seagate because it's not as picky about going from single-disk to RAID environments. If you don't ever plan to put this drive in a RAID array, the WD will be okay.

The product listing widget on Seagate's website is fairly badly broken. There are two ways I can confirm that that's indeed the 7200.10. First, the ZZF website says it is; second, it says the model number is ST3500630AS, which is a 7200.10 alright. Ok?

 
..........OK! :p

weeee more questions! Umm....so the WD has "problems" going to a raid setup? What kind of problems and what kind of hoops do you have to jump through to do a raid setup? For me, I just want a big drive for storage but of course picky as I am I want the best. I've settled on 500GB as the capacity I want and now I want to know which is the best. What is the standard WD warranty length does anyone know?

If the WD does turn out to be a better one "for me anyway" then I have to ask this.....
In the retail WD package there is supposed to be a "secureconnect" cable. Is it any better than any other standard SATA cable? If it is better then I will spend the extra dough and get the retail version.
If not then should I get the bare drive version from zipzoomfly?
 
StalkerZER0 said:
..........OK! :p

weeee more questions! Umm....so the WD has "problems" going to a raid setup? What kind of problems and what kind of hoops do you have to jump through to do a raid setup? For me, I just want a big drive for storage but of course picky as I am I want the best. I've settled on 500GB as the capacity I want and now I want to know which is the best. What is the standard WD warranty length does anyone know?

If the WD does turn out to be a better one "for me anyway" then I have to ask this.....
In the retail WD package there is supposed to be a "secureconnect" cable. Is it any better than any other standard SATA cable? If it is better then I will spend the extra dough and get the retail version.
If not then should I get the bare drive version from zipzoomfly?
Click to expand...
Look up TLER for an indication of what kind of problems you *will* run into. WD non-RE drives don't belong within five feet of a RAID array, it's that simple.
ZZF site said:
Warranty Length: Five years manufacturer warranty beginning from the manufacturing date.
Click to expand...
The secureconnect cable is a good idea if you've had a problem with the cable falling off the drive, but only then. As you can see, it's not cheap, so I'd buy the drive first and see if you have problems, then later order it if it's needed. ZZF is definitely *the* place to order from right now - they don't have the problems with shipping that Newegg does. Search for details.

 
But doesn't WD advertise their cable as something that....I don't know...actually increases speed or reliability or something? Its a load of bull?
If so then bare drive order here I come.

And besides the raid issue is there any reason why seagate's 7200.10 500GB version is any better?
 
Oh, probably some ad-speak in there. I don't care.

I'm a huge anti-fan of Seagate and WD's firmware teams. Seagate's is slow, and WD's is just plain problematic. There's no need for WD to have the two seperate types of drives, each broken in subtly different ways WRT raid arrays. But if you're not planning to move from a single drive, the WD should be okay.

 
I'm not necessarily going for the WD mind you. Basically, I want to know which 7200.10 500GB hd is better.....WD or seagate's.
 
Which root beer is better, A&W or Barq's? It depends on what you're doing with them.

PS: Trick question. Vernor's ginger ale > *. :p

 
unhappy_mage said:
Which root beer is better, A&W or Barq's? It depends on what you're doing with them.

PS: Trick question. Vernor's ginger ale > *. :p

Click to expand...

So your saying I should get the Vernor 7200.10 hd? :confused: no wait thats ginger ale.....no wait you meant a third hd is better umm....ok now I'm really confused! :confused:
 
My brother works in an IT department and he says he has seen alot more WD drive fail versus seagate. So I might as well order the Seagate.
On zipzoomfleyeeeeeeee :D
 
My point was that which drive you should get depends on your application. But I think you'll be happy with the Seagate, good choice.

BTW, the main reason drives die isn't manufacturer, it's bad power or bad cooling. Contemplate this.

 
Well......doesn't matter now. I've already gotten the 500GB 7200.10 seagate in my pc. Gotta love Fedex's overnight delievery. :D
I used the seagate application to do the partition. I'm just using the drive as additional storage and had it make just one partition only. However, its 465 GB.
I knew already that I wouldn't get a 500GB partition exactly but what the hell happened to the other 35 GB??? :confused:
Not all of it was used for system information....could it? 35GB is alot of "drive space tax" if you ask me. :(
 
1,000,000,000 (1 decimal gigabyte)
Divided by
1,073,741,824 (1 binary gigabyte)
Equals
0.931322574615478515625
Times
500
Equals
465.6612873077392578125

So it's actually right on 500 _decimal GB_ Of course, Windows and every operating system use binary GB. That's where your space went.
 
DougLite said:
1,000,000,000 (1 decimal gigabyte)
Divided by
1,073,741,824 (1 binary gigabyte)
Equals
0.931322574615478515625
Times
500
Equals
465.6612873077392578125

So it's actually right on 500 _decimal GB_ Of course, Windows and every operating system use binary GB. That's where your space went.
Click to expand...

derrr........huh? :confused:
 
StalkerZER0 said:
derrr........huh? :confused:
Click to expand...

Actually it is simple. You will get 93% of the advertised hard drive space when you install a drive. So what is 93% of 500? 465gb, the size you are currently seeing. Sucks doesn't it. :(
 
brom42 said:
Actually it is simple. You will get 93% of the advertised hard drive space when you install a drive. So what is 93% of 500? 465gb, the size you are currently seeing. Sucks doesn't it. :(
Click to expand...

Yes indeed it does. :(
Ok, so what if I had gotten that new seagate 750GB drive? What would a single partition look like on that one? I suck at math. :D
 
its easy to get a percentage. Simply multiply 750 x .93

And douglite is just saying that hard drive manufacturer's cheat by counting gigabytes in base-10 format (which we humans use a lot) while computers use base-2 to count them. Use wikipedia to find out more about them. (or take a computer programming class *sigh*)
 
Cynicist said:
its easy to get a percentage. Simply multiply 750 x .93

And douglite is just saying that hard drive manufacturer's cheat by counting gigabytes in base-10 format (which we humans use a lot) while computers use base-2 to count them. Use wikipedia to find out more about them. (or take a computer programming class *sigh*)
Click to expand...

It would have been a 697GB hd from doing the math. Thats a freakin 53 GB hd space tax.....thats ridiculously stupid! :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top