Which 160GB (ATA not SATA) drive?

[Ben]

Looking for reasonable performance 7200rpm drive of 160Gb.

The Maxtor +9 (8Mb cache) seem to be one of the cheapest, but whats
performance like? The WD (8Mb cache)seem to be priced a little on the
high side and the Seagate Ive been told runs hotter than most
(definately out of the question in the intended machine). The Samsungs
I wouldnt touch with a bargepole.

So it seems down to Maxtor or WD, worth the extra cash for WD?

Its only going to be used in a standard workstation enviroment, running
almost 24/7 but not under partculary heavy use. Its replacing a 80GB
D740X which is slowly dying and will be paired with another 80GB D740X.

 

[Rod Speed]

Looking for reasonable performance 7200rpm drive of 160Gb.

The Maxtor +9 (8Mb cache) seem to be one of the cheapest, but
whats performance like? The WD (8Mb cache)seem to be priced
a little on the high side and the Seagate Ive been told runs hotter
than most (definately out of the question in the intended machine).
The Samsungs I wouldnt touch with a bargepole.

So it seems down to Maxtor or WD, worth the extra cash for WD?

I would go for the WD myself. Only you can say on the price difference.

 

[JM]

Looking for reasonable performance 7200rpm drive of 160Gb.

The Maxtor +9 (8Mb cache) seem to be one of the cheapest, but whats
performance like? The WD (8Mb cache)seem to be priced a little on the
high side and the Seagate Ive been told runs hotter than most
(definately out of the question in the intended machine). The Samsungs
I wouldnt touch with a bargepole.

So it seems down to Maxtor or WD, worth the extra cash for WD?

Its only going to be used in a standard workstation enviroment, running
almost 24/7 but not under partculary heavy use. Its replacing a 80GB
D740X which is slowly dying and will be paired with another 80GB D740X.

What's wrong with Samsung HDD?

 

[Arno Wagner]

Looking for reasonable performance 7200rpm drive of 160Gb.

The Maxtor +9 (8Mb cache) seem to be one of the cheapest, but whats
performance like?

Speed is o.k.:

/local/wagner#hdparm -t /dev/hdc
/dev/hdc:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.15 seconds = 55.65 MB/sec

But that is only at the beginning of the disk. It drops down
to 48MB/sec in the middle of the disk and to about 30MB/s at the
end.

Still pretty fast for linear read. I don't have any benchmarking
SW to ty other stuff.

Arno

The WD (8Mb cache)seem to be priced a little on the
high side and the Seagate Ive been told runs hotter than most
(definately out of the question in the intended machine). The Samsungs
I wouldnt touch with a bargepole.

 

[puss]

Speed is o.k.:

/local/wagner#hdparm -t /dev/hdc
/dev/hdc:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.15 seconds = 55.65 MB/sec

But that is only at the beginning of the disk. It drops down
to 48MB/sec in the middle of the disk and to about 30MB/s at the
end.

Still pretty fast for linear read. I don't have any benchmarking
SW to ty other stuff.

Arno

All bull, go read Storage Reviews on these drives, they run cool.


The Samsungs

 

[Rod Speed]

All bull,
Nope.

go read Storage Reviews on these drives, they run cool.

Thats with decent airflow. Not all machines provide that.