• 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.

seagate parallel or WD ?

S

sparks

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 19, 2004
Messages
3,206
Building a new system and need a pair of 300G drives. I was going WD but how about
the new seagate parallel drives?

ps I was thinking about a 36G raptor for a main c drive...there is talk that a 7200 parallel is faster, any truth to this?


thanks for help on this

sparks
 
I just got a Seagate 7800.10 and it's very fast, I love it. I personally don't trust western digital. My last WD drive lasted 5 hours, the previous one about 4 months :rolleyes:

I believe that some sata drives with a 16mb cache are faster than the 36gb raptor. However, WD is coming out with a 16mb cache 36 raptor, but I don't know if they're available.
 
the WD360ADFD is very hard to find. At the price point, it is better to get the 74GB WD740ADFD from newegg with the $30 re-bait.

I would say that purchasing the 'old' 36GB raptor is a waste of money. Looking at the benchmarks over at SR it appears that it's not faster than the current gen 7200 rpm drive. Additionally, it's said to be loud and hot.

I really do not want to make a recommendation on the 300 GB drives. There is evidence that the 7200.9 seagates are rather slow/ sluggish compared to the other competitors' drives. I do not know about the 7200.10 series.

I am not sure how much faith I'd put into people's experiences concerning the reliability of drives. Considering that most people have a very small sample size, it is hard to have reliable numbers. I have personally had 3 out of 5 of the Samsung drives that I own fail on me, yet I don't think that they are inherently unreliable.
 
drizzt81 said:
I am not sure how much faith I'd put into people's experiences concerning the reliability of drives. Considering that most people have a very small sample size, it is hard to have reliable numbers. I have personally had 3 out of 5 of the Samsung drives that I own fail on me, yet I don't think that they are inherently unreliable.
Click to expand...

That is fair, I know a lot of people who use and love wd. But once a company has burned me twice, that's about it for them. And even if the seagates are slightly slower, I think that their 5 year warrantee makes up for it.
 
Slartibartfast said:
That is fair, I know a lot of people who use and love wd. But once a company has burned me twice, that's about it for them. And even if the seagates are slightly slower, I think that their 5 year warrantee makes up for it.
Click to expand...
I completely understand your personal choice, if two of my HDDs from the same company failed within such a short period, I'd be doing the same. My point is that for every HDD manufacturer, there is at least one poster in every forum, who had a couple of drives go bad on them.

My last HDD purchasing decision was based on power consumption and availability of a review, rather than anything else.
 
2 of my 3 WD Caviar SEs (1 80 and 2 120s) died within 2 years, they wouldn't honor the warranty on one of them, so I sold the working one and the RMA for one of the others and won't touch WD now. Oh, and they also made me pay s/h for the RMA which always ticks me off.

F WD

Samsung for the win.
 
Your sample size is three. Any statistics majors want to jump in here?

 
his population is also 3.
THAT AINT GOOD LOL



but are the perpendicular drives as fast as they say?
Some of them are saying that they are as fast as a 10k raptor on
reads and writes.

they are so new that I can't find a thing on the hdsite and not much of anything on
reviews.


sparks
 
Personally I would go with the Seagate, they have a 5 year warrenty for a reason, I have 4 of them, all different models and from all different times, oldest is 80gb pata from a dell, it works perfect after 4 years.
 
My WD sample size is 7, with 1 sold and 1 failure.
My Samsung sample size is 7 with 2 failures
My Maxtor sample size is 4 with 1 DOA and 1 failure
My Seagate sample size is 4 with 1 stopped using
My Hitachi/ IBM sample size is 7 with 3 failures and 1 stopped using
My Quantum sample size is 1

woo woo ePenor

and that does not include drives that are not in the SR database.
 
Slartibartfast said:
And my sample size is two, but we both have 100% failure rates :D
Click to expand...

i have 9 WD and 1 seagate, no failures. i think the statistics favor my systems than your's ;)
 
protias said:
i have 9 WD and 1 seagate, no failures. i think the statistics favor my systems than your's ;)
Click to expand...

ahh statistics, abusing them is one of the geekiest ways to have fun :p :D
 
dandragonrage said:
And I think you're a lucky bastard ;)
Click to expand...

well, 10 WD drives actually. had to toss the drive in the computer my mom had because it had 5 boot sector trojans. that one was about 5 years old when i tossed it. sad to see a good, working drive tossed, no matter who the manufacturer is.
 
8 WD's - no failures in 6 years in one system

1 maxtor - died
1 ibm - died

3 samsung's - all good
2 seagates - still running!
 
heading on over!!

* runs to see what drives are in the 17 systems in our office i build, including the servers*
 
i was so close to naming my drives, but i wanted to make sure i have the exact ones. cant wait to get home tonight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top