[hd for pc always on]Samsung slow than other hd?..& 5.4k rpm that i can find new actually?

[Danzig Glenn]

Hello to all!
I'm reading web and ng for know..and so choose what hd buy for a pc that
must go 24/h always on (or near this...)

As I have read on productor site chart of hd, i have noticed that
samsung hd require less W than other hd... (remaining in 3,5inch drive)
so they wouldn't be bad for this pc....
BUT are they so slow than other hd???? (if so: we can understand easily
why they require less power...:/ )

Cause they requere less power...i hope they get hot less than the other
hd 7200...it's really??or i wrong???


They aren't much distant/far (in speed performance) than the 5400rpm
that we can found actually on some site??(i means: samsung self, or
wd...saegate)

The speed isn't the first thing needed in absolut for the use that i
will do of this drive.... but: if isn't so much better in performance
than a good 5400rpm...i will buy one this (5400rpm i mean,so it doesn't
cost more, and don't requere a good ventilation like a 7200rpm
"monster"...in the case after we will deicide what productor and model
precisely).... OR another hd (much probably: a saegate!)a little more
performant (isn't a bad thing, and after is i will replace with
another...i can use it for another pc for other works, else if it's so
slow....it's less probably that i will use on another pc...)


I hope you can understand me (sorry for my non perferct english :° ) and
help me

 

[Rod Speed]

I'm reading web and ng for know..and so choose what hd
buy for a pc that must go 24/h always on (or near this...)

All drives will do fine in that sort of use.

As I have read on productor site chart of hd, i have
noticed that samsung hd require less W than other hd...
(remaining in 3,5inch drive) so they wouldn't be bad for this pc....
True.

BUT are they so slow than other hd????

The previous model range were a bit slower than
the best performers, but not by all that much.

Not clear what the story is now with the latest releases,
those havent yet been reviewed much at all, and not by
the most thorough reviewers like storagereview.

(if so: we can understand easily why they require less power...:/ )

Nar, its much more complicated than that.

Cause they requere less power...i hope they get hot
less than the other hd 7200...it's really??or i wrong???

Yes, the temperature the drive gets to mostly depends
on the power dissipated in the drive. There is nowhere
else for that power to go, it all ends up as heat.

They aren't much distant/far (in speed performance)
than the 5400rpm that we can found actually on some
site??(i means: samsung self, or wd...saegate)

Correct, and I doubt you'd be able to pick it in a proper double
blind trial without being able to use a benchmark or diagnostic.

You should be able to pick between a 5400 RPM drive and
a 7200 RPM drive, but not normally between the different
drives with the same platter densitys and same RPM even
when differences can be seen in a benchmark.

The speed isn't the first thing needed in absolut for the use that i
will do of this drive.... but: if isn't so much better in performance than
a good 5400rpm...i will buy one this (5400rpm i mean,so it doesn't
cost more, and don't requere a good ventilation like a 7200rpm "monster"...

Main problem is that there arent a hell of a lot of 5400
RPM drives buyable anymore, can be a bit hard to find.

in the case after we will deicide what productor and model
precisely).... OR another hd (much probably: a saegate!)a little
more performant (isn't a bad thing, and after is i will replace with
another...i can use it for another pc for other works, else if it's so
slow....it's less probably that i will use on another pc...)

I hope you can understand me (sorry for my non perferct english :° )

Thats ok, I'll just flog you with this wet lettuce leaf.

 

[Rod Speed]

Yep...but the 5400 of them..aren't so "energy saver"
(rispect to other 5400rpm!)...just about equal w requesting
of other normal hd (all the 7200rpm of samsung are
projected for be energy saver so...i think..)

I cant understand what you are saying there.

Ok...the previous is the single point (if i remeber...)

Or there. If you mean thats only seen with one
of the benchmark measures, thats not correct.

Yep...easy to found info on most bought products...
but not for less knowed (like the samsung in hd ...)

Yeah, it isnt even easy to find anyone selling them
either with the samsung hard drive, at least in my country.

Possible, but not as easy as with say WD.

I don't wanted to means to understand on what exactly tecnical cause...
but (at same efficiency...or about to be the same) if one hd it's much
energy saver...much probably it's not best performer in speed
(and in this case with samsung....it's so as i, and you, have said)

In fact the difference in power use is almost 2:1
and there is nothing like that with the performance.

Ok ..it's a good thing good this

do you means in the case of 7200rpm samsung...isn't it?
in the case of 7200 performant...you don't need a benchmark for
recognize what is one drive..and what the other

Cant understand that one either.

Yep it's hard...but not so much like other components

Uhmmm...what ?)

You deaf too ? |-)

 

[Danzig Glenn]

Hello!

buy for a pc that must go 24/h always on (or near this...)
As I have read on productor site chart of hd, i have
noticed that samsung hd require less W than other hd...
(remaining in 3,5inch drive) so they wouldn't be bad for this pc....

(rispect to other 5400rpm!)...just about equal w requesting
of other normal hd (all the 7200rpm of samsung are

I cant understand what you are saying there.

Hust this: differently from the model at 7200rpm, the 5400rpm of
Samsung..aren't "less power requirement" compared to other 5400rpm
(else they can be about 1/3 of Watts requireb by "normal" 7200rpm

Or there. If you mean thats only seen with one
of the benchmark measures, thats not correct.

You had mean this in your previous post (wrong to write? )
and i was just writing that for see the difference from 5400and rpm it's
not needed a benchmark: it's a clare difference without it too!

Yeah, it isnt even easy to find anyone selling them
either with the samsung hard drive, at least in my country.

Possible, but not as easy as with say WD.

In fact the difference in power use is almost 2:1
and there is nothing like that with the performance.

Yes
and me that before to "discover" Samsung hd's...had wasted time
seraching the number of platter and head of every hd for see what
consume les energy.....

Cant understand that one either.

Just this: i was asking to you if you wanted to means this in some words
"that the difference from an 7200rpm drive and a 5400 wasn't noticeable
without benchmark"
and i just answered this : "Yep, if the 7200rpm is one of Samsung(cause
they aren't performant as we had said) i think that it's near to a
5400rpm drive, else if is a performant 7200 the difference is not small!

isn't so??

You deaf too ? |-)

All deaf?
but....it's not necessary to hear this...just to wrote ))

(i'm joking..don't worry!)

 

[Rod Speed]

Hust this: differently from the model at 7200rpm, the 5400rpm of
Samsung..aren't "less power requirement" compared to other 5400rpm
(else they can be about 1/3 of Watts requireb by "normal" 7200rpm

You appear to be saying that the samsung 5400 RPM drives
dont use significantly less power than other 5400 RPM drives.
That is not correct, they are quite a bit less than the others.
Most obviously when comparing the 5400 RPM samsungs
with say the WD AB drives which are their 5400 RPM drives.

For example the Samsung SV4002H has an idle power
of 4.2W compared with the WD400AB of 7.5W, thats
only a little less than half the power.

The Samsung SP4002H has an idle power of 5.5/5.8,
presumably the difference is the number of platters.
Oddly enough the WD600BB still has 7.5W which does
make you wonder if the WD figures are that reliable.

You had mean this in your previous post
Nope.

(wrong to write? )
Nope.

and i was just writing that for see the difference from 5400and rpm
it's not needed a benchmark: it's a clare difference without it too!

You appear to be saying that the difference between
a 5400 RPM and a 7200 RPM drive should be obvious
without using a benchmark there, and I agree with that.

But you get the significant power saving even
when just comparing the samsung 5400 RPM
drives with say the WD 5400 RPM drives.

Or when comparing the Samsung 7200 RPM
drives with say the WD 7200 RPM drives.

In fact the difference in power use is almost 2:1
and there is nothing like that with the performance.

Yes
and me that before to "discover" Samsung hd's...had wasted time
seraching the number of platter and head of every hd for see what
consume les energy.....



Just this: i was asking to you if you wanted to means this in some words
"that the difference from an 7200rpm drive and a 5400 wasn't noticeable
without benchmark"

No, I didnt mean that. That would normally
be noticeable without using a benchmark.

and i just answered this : "Yep, if the 7200rpm is one
of Samsung (cause they aren't performant as we had
said) i think that it's near to a 5400rpm drive,

No its not near to the performance of a 5400 RPM drive.

else if is a performant 7200 the difference is not small!
isn't so??

Fraid not.

All deaf?
but....it's not necessary to hear this...just to wrote ))

(i'm joking..don't worry!)

So was I |-)

 

[Rod Speed]

Hello!
Thanks much for the answer!
and sorry for the wait!

No problem. Life wasnt meant to be lived in the fast lane all the time |-)

Not exactly
I was just sayng that 5400 aren't so less power
requesting thant 7200 (always Samsung!)...the request
it's about the equal (the 5.4k just a little little less)

And if we compare the 5400 rpm of WD, with the 7200
(always of wd!)the situation isn't different: both require
more Watts than samsung, but between they (i Means:
wd 5,4k rpm and 7.2rpm) the difference it's just a bit
Correct.

What i wanted to tell?that choosing 5400 for The W..
(considering the prestational gap, and remeber that
the higher perfromance aren't what i'm looking for)
isn't a good thing
Correct.

choosing they for the "theorical most affidable / reliably "
(remeber that i need for a pc that must run 24/h ) can be
right, but.... we can be sure that (cause a better tecnology
in 7,200 rpm...with higher rpm the reliably remain the same
of 5400..) they are really most reliably than 7200????
:/

Probably not. Bit hard to be sure tho, particularly if you want
to run the drive for 5 years tho, bit early to tell yet if the 7200
RPM drives left on all the time will last as long as the 5400s.

they declare the same: 500.000 hours...but...we
know that what they declare most time isn't so trust...

Correct.

But certainly no evidence that the 7200 RPM drives dont
last as long. The Fujitisu MPGs have died like flys but then
so have some of the Quantum Fireball 5400 RPM drives too.

the samsung you are talking about have 1platter (no more and 2 heads

if you go to see the disc data sheet all samsung (i means the
actual..not the legacy...that we cannot found new, for buy) have
1 platter, the only thing that change it's the number of heads

the wd on the other side have much platter: it's here
the biggest cause of differce in Energy consuming
between all other disk and samsung i think!

Nope, you'll find that the single platter WDs still take about
the same amount of power, like the WD200AB for example.

We had "made" some conclusion, but now remain to be found
if the hd 5400rpm of another productor with a little more power
requesting than Samsung5400...are more performant too

They are, but not by that much.

BUT...remain less power requesting than samsung 7200
Nope.

(else...i take samsung! )

I would.

( i know and think that can be a little hard...but i ask... )

The main problem currently is that we dont yet have any
reviews on the storagereview site for the latest samsungs.

so i'm not sure for goes for 5400 or 7200... (cause we aren't
sure to have more realiability and duration than 5400rpm 8-o )

And wont know that for years yet.