quote: I really wasn't going to say anything here, but I feel compelled to do so. First, I almost completely disagree with nwavguy about the merits of close mic SPL measurement. The only good things about them are...
1) you can use a poor SPL meter in an inadequate, noisy setting
2) it's cheap
The problems with Anandtech's methods are much greater than this, however. The HDDs are not even isloated from other noise sources which appear to be far louder than the HDDs being measured. That's totally illogical and careless if you're seeking any kind of accuracy in acoustical measurements.
So...have all drives up to this point only had the drive shaft secured on one side? The end of the shaft just spinning in the air between the top platter and the casing? That seems like a very unlikely thing given how easily that could result in the platters moving and hitting the heads or even hitting the casing. Given the G forces they're rated to handle even when running makes it sound even less likely.
Oh, and haven't all drives had auto-parking heads for like a decade or more? The only reason the heads would move onto the platter during spin-up is if the controller specifically drives the armature to do so. So basically, SecurePark is WD saying "hey, we don't do something stupid with the heads anymore!"
I hate how every company has to give their own trademarked name to a basic technology that everybody has.
I've noticed in stores 250, 320 and 400GB versions of AAKS are they the same revision drives? I'm ready to order one if so.
Also, with the same capacities WD has drives in series KS.
Please, I need support, I'm buying a new PC. Thank you
At the time Dave wrote this, our price engine was showing ClubIT to have it for $188.89 if I remember right. I just checked and it was up to $199. We will get the article updated shortly.
when we no longer perceived Made in China as a bad thing, I've been hearing that it's actually preferred over the recent streams of Made in Thailand electronics.
It happened to Japan & Taiwan before, now most people are happy to see those labels when they buy something.
And of course, the cool-er things in life are still Made in USA ;)
-Not that where something is produced has anything to do with the quality.
In your benchmarking, you did not mention the size of the swapfile you have your OS set to use. I am sure it has an effect on application throughput. A static sized file is needed for benchmarking consistency.
You can fill a WHS with 6 1TB drives for so cheap it will be great! Acoustics and heat will be a selling point for lots of people what that comes around.
I have avoided IBM drives after mine died on me after only about one year. Of course Hitachi bought them out, but I don't know if they have any better longevity than they used to.
An Emachines computer I bought a few years ago had a Deskstar drive. Other than the anti-static meowing noise, no problems with it for the 3 years I owned it.
I am most impressed at how well the Hitachi 1TB drive continues to sit at the top of so many of the benchmarks.
Your conclusion stating how well the WD drive does against the Seagate omitted the point raised in the Samsung article recently posted here. That is, Seagate's drive is almost a year older and their new 7200.11 drives are just around the corner.
Overall, it is impressive to see how tightly grouped these drive are. There seems very little reason to even consider a Raptor anymore.
"There seems very little reason to even consider a Raptor anymore. "
Except for hte fact that the Raptor 150 is 1 1/2 years old (thats older than the 7200.10 you mentioned) and a 300g Raptor, hopefully with 32m cache is also right around the corner. A300g Raptor with 32m cache will once again own the retail sector by a wide margin.
It will be interesting to see what new Raptor with 32MB of cache can do. I am still skeptical whether it will be able to manage the kind of performance advantage the Raptors had when they were first introduced. I personally think WD will have a tough time charging a significant price premium over other 300GB drives, let alone 750GB and 1TB drives.
quote: am still skeptical whether it will be able to manage the kind of performance advantage the Raptors had when they were first introduced.
You mean the 'whopping' 58MB/s average ? The raptors when first released had issues. Less so now, and they perform much better. Not good enough to justify the cost in my opinion, but whatever floats your boat . . .
The Raptor would need more than 32MB cache to get (far) ahead of the pack again, like it did when it was first introduced. Three things they can do:
1. Higher density platter :perpendicular
2. 15K rpm? I don't even know if that is possible, but it would be cool.
3. Like you said: 32MB or even more cache.
The higher density would slow it down, because the heads would need to be more precise. I think that is why the raptors always have less capacity than their caviar brand.
Right now the Raptor 150 is ahead of the pack with 16m cache vs 32, and a much lower density per platter, and no perpendicular storage. Add those 3 things and we might be cooking. I have heard rumors that 15k is in the works, but not confirmed.
Funny that, I own a 750GB Seagate, the computer sits less than 4 feet from my head when I sleep up on a desk, and I cannot hear it. Now, If it were not the end of summer, and I were not living in the desert, had all my fans off, I MAY hear the occational disk chatter, but I'll be dahmed if it would ever keep me awake . . .
??? I dunno. I see AT's comparison always has the Raptor being loud, but I hafve had 1 36g 2 75g and 2 150g Raptors, none of them have been noisy at all, not even compared to other drives. Was I just lucky or is AT's samples unlucky?
Actually, the difference is that the EIDE drive only is offered up to a 500GB capacity. This precludes it from having the additional features given to the 750GB drive, as mentioned in the article.
If you're only using the single drive under "normal" desktop usage, however, you're not terribly likely to see a big difference in performance between a 500GB SATA and 500GB EIDE, all things being equal.
i understand the sata vs. pata arguments. it's just the new features and low power draw that interest me and since the model numbers look so similar i thought that they would share the same characteristics.
Besides the one using a slower, outdated interface? Probably not. Thankfully, the 750GB drive is NOT available in PATA format as far as I can tell. WD's EIDE offerings top out at 500GB on their website. Seriously, who buys a top-end hard drive in EIDE format these days? Hell I only have one IDE connection on my motherboard, and that's no longer in use!
the 750gb version may be a top end part but the 500gb is very reasonably priced. anyway, you can never convince me that a hard drive is "high end", whatever the cost. real world performance does not vary much and depends very much on usage patterns. now an ssd or a revolutionary redesign of hdd i can consider to be high end.
Agreed - if you can use SATA, you will. Some people can't, however, and the EIDE interface isn't an incredible bottleneck to the system (like, for example, the move from ISA to PCI graphics cards was in adopting the new bus).
You're right, though - there's no reason to intentionally buy EIDE anymore if you have SATA available in your system. :)
'Won't there be negligible P-ATA demand, with none from manuf's? So, 'probably no P-ATA version, or a hefty premium on it.
If my Linux distro supported the S-ATA controller chip, I'd spend the $20-$25 on a PCI or PCI-e S-ATA card and ignore the P-ATA. It would be a shame to have that P-ATA 750GB and later find yourself w/o a m/b having P_ATA to make good use of it! [Okay, you could probably buy a P-ATA controller card....]
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
37 Comments
Back to Article
miahallen - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link
http://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php...">Very good discussion concerning the problems with anandtech's sound measuring methodology here.The Boston Dangler - Friday, August 10, 2007 - link
for Samsung to offer larger drivesLord Evermore - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
So...have all drives up to this point only had the drive shaft secured on one side? The end of the shaft just spinning in the air between the top platter and the casing? That seems like a very unlikely thing given how easily that could result in the platters moving and hitting the heads or even hitting the casing. Given the G forces they're rated to handle even when running makes it sound even less likely.Lord Evermore - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Oh, and haven't all drives had auto-parking heads for like a decade or more? The only reason the heads would move onto the platter during spin-up is if the controller specifically drives the armature to do so. So basically, SecurePark is WD saying "hey, we don't do something stupid with the heads anymore!"I hate how every company has to give their own trademarked name to a basic technology that everybody has.
falc0ne - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
I've noticed in stores 250, 320 and 400GB versions of AAKS are they the same revision drives? I'm ready to order one if so.Also, with the same capacities WD has drives in series KS.
Please, I need support, I'm buying a new PC. Thank you
Adul - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Where did you find the Seagate for 180?Gary Key - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
At the time Dave wrote this, our price engine was showing ClubIT to have it for $188.89 if I remember right. I just checked and it was up to $199. We will get the article updated shortly.AdamK47 - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Want!gloinsir - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
The following charthttp://images.anandtech.com/graphs/wd750_080807108...">http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/wd750_080807108...
, the Load Acoustics Chart, was missing results for the Hitachi 7K1000 with AAM/Off.
Gary Key - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Fixed with a press of the refresh button... strange things today.bigpow - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
signs of times..when we no longer perceived Made in China as a bad thing, I've been hearing that it's actually preferred over the recent streams of Made in Thailand electronics.
It happened to Japan & Taiwan before, now most people are happy to see those labels when they buy something.
And of course, the cool-er things in life are still Made in USA ;)
-Not that where something is produced has anything to do with the quality.
Googer - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
I noticed the Western Digital Raptor 150 was missing from this chart:http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/wd750_080807108...">http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/wd750_080807108...
Gary Key - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
I have no idea why, but after hitting our engine update button again, it is there now. :)Googer - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
In your benchmarking, you did not mention the size of the swapfile you have your OS set to use. I am sure it has an effect on application throughput. A static sized file is needed for benchmarking consistency.Gary Key - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Our standard swapfile is fixed at 2048MB and we clean the prefetch folder after each benchmark run.imaheadcase - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
You can fill a WHS with 6 1TB drives for so cheap it will be great! Acoustics and heat will be a selling point for lots of people what that comes around.yyrkoon - Monday, August 13, 2007 - link
Heh, have you ever owned a 'Deathstar' ? Many, including myself will never venture down that road again.Martimus - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link
I have avoided IBM drives after mine died on me after only about one year. Of course Hitachi bought them out, but I don't know if they have any better longevity than they used to.strikeback03 - Tuesday, August 14, 2007 - link
An Emachines computer I bought a few years ago had a Deskstar drive. Other than the anti-static meowing noise, no problems with it for the 3 years I owned it.mostlyprudent - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
I am most impressed at how well the Hitachi 1TB drive continues to sit at the top of so many of the benchmarks.Your conclusion stating how well the WD drive does against the Seagate omitted the point raised in the Samsung article recently posted here. That is, Seagate's drive is almost a year older and their new 7200.11 drives are just around the corner.
Overall, it is impressive to see how tightly grouped these drive are. There seems very little reason to even consider a Raptor anymore.
retrospooty - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
"There seems very little reason to even consider a Raptor anymore. "Except for hte fact that the Raptor 150 is 1 1/2 years old (thats older than the 7200.10 you mentioned) and a 300g Raptor, hopefully with 32m cache is also right around the corner. A300g Raptor with 32m cache will once again own the retail sector by a wide margin.
mostlyprudent - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
It will be interesting to see what new Raptor with 32MB of cache can do. I am still skeptical whether it will be able to manage the kind of performance advantage the Raptors had when they were first introduced. I personally think WD will have a tough time charging a significant price premium over other 300GB drives, let alone 750GB and 1TB drives.yyrkoon - Monday, August 13, 2007 - link
You mean the 'whopping' 58MB/s average ? The raptors when first released had issues. Less so now, and they perform much better. Not good enough to justify the cost in my opinion, but whatever floats your boat . . .
ceefka - Friday, August 10, 2007 - link
The Raptor would need more than 32MB cache to get (far) ahead of the pack again, like it did when it was first introduced. Three things they can do:1. Higher density platter :perpendicular
2. 15K rpm? I don't even know if that is possible, but it would be cool.
3. Like you said: 32MB or even more cache.
Martimus - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link
The higher density would slow it down, because the heads would need to be more precise. I think that is why the raptors always have less capacity than their caviar brand.retrospooty - Friday, August 10, 2007 - link
Right now the Raptor 150 is ahead of the pack with 16m cache vs 32, and a much lower density per platter, and no perpendicular storage. Add those 3 things and we might be cooking. I have heard rumors that 15k is in the works, but not confirmed.Basilisk - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Or, you may need something loud enough to drown-out your partner's snoring. :)yyrkoon - Monday, August 13, 2007 - link
Funny that, I own a 750GB Seagate, the computer sits less than 4 feet from my head when I sleep up on a desk, and I cannot hear it. Now, If it were not the end of summer, and I were not living in the desert, had all my fans off, I MAY hear the occational disk chatter, but I'll be dahmed if it would ever keep me awake . . .Sometimes I wonder about some of you guys . . .
retrospooty - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
??? I dunno. I see AT's comparison always has the Raptor being loud, but I hafve had 1 36g 2 75g and 2 150g Raptors, none of them have been noisy at all, not even compared to other drives. Was I just lucky or is AT's samples unlucky?semo - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
is there a difference between the serial ata and the pata se16 wd drives?Dave Robinet - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Actually, the difference is that the EIDE drive only is offered up to a 500GB capacity. This precludes it from having the additional features given to the 750GB drive, as mentioned in the article.If you're only using the single drive under "normal" desktop usage, however, you're not terribly likely to see a big difference in performance between a 500GB SATA and 500GB EIDE, all things being equal.
Thanks for reading!
dave
semo - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
i understand the sata vs. pata arguments. it's just the new features and low power draw that interest me and since the model numbers look so similar i thought that they would share the same characteristics.Frumious1 - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Besides the one using a slower, outdated interface? Probably not. Thankfully, the 750GB drive is NOT available in PATA format as far as I can tell. WD's EIDE offerings top out at 500GB on their website. Seriously, who buys a top-end hard drive in EIDE format these days? Hell I only have one IDE connection on my motherboard, and that's no longer in use!semo - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
the 750gb version may be a top end part but the 500gb is very reasonably priced. anyway, you can never convince me that a hard drive is "high end", whatever the cost. real world performance does not vary much and depends very much on usage patterns. now an ssd or a revolutionary redesign of hdd i can consider to be high end.Dave Robinet - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Agreed - if you can use SATA, you will. Some people can't, however, and the EIDE interface isn't an incredible bottleneck to the system (like, for example, the move from ISA to PCI graphics cards was in adopting the new bus).You're right, though - there's no reason to intentionally buy EIDE anymore if you have SATA available in your system. :)
Thanks for reading!
dave
Basilisk - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
'Won't there be negligible P-ATA demand, with none from manuf's? So, 'probably no P-ATA version, or a hefty premium on it.If my Linux distro supported the S-ATA controller chip, I'd spend the $20-$25 on a PCI or PCI-e S-ATA card and ignore the P-ATA. It would be a shame to have that P-ATA 750GB and later find yourself w/o a m/b having P_ATA to make good use of it! [Okay, you could probably buy a P-ATA controller card....]
wilburpan - Thursday, August 9, 2007 - link
Who buys a large capacity EIDE hard drive? I did recently.Why? I have an old computer that I've repurposed into a file server running Linux. This computer is old enough that it doesn't have SATA connections.