Well most 7200 RPM drives up till fairly recently had 2MB buffers and then
jumped striaght to 8MB buffers. Regarding the performance the 7200's do
transfer data faster from the higher rotational speed because even at 7200RPM
the the data can barely oversaturate an ATA33 interface. SO increasing the
rotational speed means more data passes under the heads in a given time frame
therefore increased performance baring severe drive fragmentation. Is it
perfectly fine to mix ATA66/ATA100/ATA133 drives on a cable just don't ever
put an ATA33 dirve on the same cable as one of those or it will take a
performance hit. At my last place of employment (for several years working in
the RMA/Tech Support dept of a parts distrubitor) regardless of brand or
rotational speed the hard drives came back in a pretty stable percentage vs
the amount sold(Including the IBMs). There we sold approx 3000-4000 dries per
month there so I have a pretty good baseline from which to make my assesment.
As for the IBM drives being nick'd death star, well I've heard maxtor called
"Maxcrap","Maxfail","Maxtorpor". I've heard Western Digtals called "Western
Digitless", Thier caviar line called "Crapiar", and "Caveat" I think the
point is made that just because someone nick'd a brand of drive due to a
failure of several very specific models does not reflect on the full line of
thier products. Now really it only comes down to how much do you want to
spend for what speed and buy that drive regardless of brand. If it fails ALL
of the current HD manufacturers are very easy to deal with to get a
replacment.
They will all do an anvanced replacment direct to the consumer(You do need to
have CC# to give them to get an advanced replacment).
-Joe
On Sunday 25 August 2002 02:41 pm, you wrote:
> The IBM's are JUNK! They call them deckstar they have been given the nick
> name Death Star.
> I prefer Western Digitals they can RMA them in usually 1 bussiness day
> sometimes 2. They also usually offer you a good upgrade deal if it ever
> fails within the 3 years which usually I have had no failures until the 4th
> or 5th year of use.
>
> Maxtors I have mixed opinion of. They seem nice at first but usually fail
> within the first 2 years.
>
> Now as far as the 7200 rpm drives basically it is just faster rpm but not
> actuall data transfer.
> They also usually fail no matter what brand qiucker then the 5400 drives
> do.
>
> The only reason they seem faster is because some of the not all of the
> 7200rpm drives have more caching buffers on them instead of 4 meg usually a
> 8 meg. How ever some of the 5400 drives has the 8 meg as well thus
> performing just as good.
>
> It also depends on if your motherboard will support the dma 66, 100, 133 if
> the drive is a 7200 rpm 8 meg buffer and your system supports 100-133 dma
> then you will see good performance how ever if it is only a dma 66 then the
> 5400 drives will usually work exactly same. Next will your mother board
> support that size of a drive.
>
> Those are some guide lines. Also FYI I use 5400 drive for digital video
> ripping works fine! Even though everyone says that you have to have a 7200
> drive which is pure bull.
>
> The processor and running it at 100 dma mode for the drive make up for it.
> BTW the guys I trade music vids with they are having the 7200 drives
> failing right now there is 4 of them in one month.
>
> Your CPU Speed, Ram, and Data Buss, Video will make up the most of the
> performance on your system.
>
> Good Luck!
> Bill Preece
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Smitty" <a.smitty@verizon.net>
> To: <slug@nks.net>
> Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 7:22 PM
> Subject: [SLUG] Hard Drive brand question
>
> > I am looking at purchasing a couple new hard drives. My choices are
>
> Western
>
> > Digital, IBM, or Maxtor. All are Ultra ATA, 40 gb, 7200 rpm. Does
> > anyone have experience as to which is "the best" (TM).
> > Smitty
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:05:45 EDT