500 TO 750 GIG HDD ROUND UP : MAXTOR WD SEAGATE HITACHI

500 TO 750 GIG HDD ROUND UP : MAXTOR WD SEAGATE HITACHI
Posted:2006-07-10 By hdd review Number of View:137403
500 TO 750 GIG HDD ROUND UP : MAXTOR WD SEAGATE HITACHI By :hdd review Posted:2006-07-10 xtreview is your : Video card - cpu - memory - Hard drive - power supply unit source are u looking for more stockage space?.more films ,music ,dvd etc... hard drive manufacturers already know about the grwing need for space .sumusng have already large disk of 500gig , seagate has even 750 gig hdd.lets see witch hard drive performe better. we had 6 disk to test today, all has the satst 2 conntection " 3 Gbits /s" and support ncq. From an architectural point , the principal difference between the models tested is located in  the number of plates  to reach the capacity of 500 Gig.The Hitachi 7K500   thus embarks 5 plates of 100 Gig, against 4 of 125 Gig for Seagate Barracuda 7200.9, Maxtor DiamondMax 11 and Western Caviar SE16 WD5000KS. Thanks to the use of the perpendicular recording, Seagate arrives however to this density with only 3 plates of 167 Gig on its Barracuda 7200.10.In fact, only 4 plates are necessary to Seagate to reach the 750 Gig .Seagate is the first hdd to introduce on discs SATA 3"1/2 discs using this type of recording which makes  possible to increase the density surface  appreciably. Hitachi for example already launched a range of portable hard disks using this technology. Here discs used for this test - Hitachi 7K500 500 Gig - Maxtor DiamondMax 11 500 Gig - Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 500 Gig - Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 500 Gig - Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 750 Gig - Western DIGITAL Caviar SE16 WD5000KS 500 Gig] The dates of tested discs manufacture  vary from December 2005 to March 2006, as it is indicated abrove. No  surprise on the level of the charts controllers, the chips are the same ones as those used on discs with less capacity except  for Seagate since on the 7200.10 we finds the chip controller ST instead of usual .However, the two chips are compatible pine with pine and the PCB of the 7200.9 500 Go and 7200.10 750 Go are identical.Maxtor uses the Agere controller, counters Infineon for Hitachi and Marvell at Western. Only the discs Hitachi and Western has a traditional power connector disk 500 gig to 750 gig test test was done using intel i975X platform. The Seagate discs have the most powerful cache management, followed by Hitachi and Maxtor.The level posted by the Western disc is low since it exploits only half of the cache available here is the brust speed of the 500 Gig, discs . the 7200.10 is fastest but it is nearly followed by Western disk. Here now figures of maximum, average and minimal  sequential brust speed for all the discs.They are thus 7200.10 the fastest with 60 to 61.8 M/S  average and 74.9 to 76.3 M/S as peak:the 750 Gig disk has better performance over the 500 Gig one due to the uses of larger plates offering a greater density (187,5 Gig vs 167 Gig).Western follows closely, and  then come the Maxtor.With 47 M/S  average, the discs from old generation such as the 7K500 and the 7200.9 have lower performance. As for the access time on the other hand the 7K500 has clearly  the head.Maxtor has the worest performance  whereas the discs deom Western and Seagate offer equivalent levels of performance. We begin the less synthetic tests  obtained for profiles "XP Startup", "Loading Application" and "General Use" of PC Mark 2005. First thing to be noted, that the Maxtor  and Hitachi discs profit more from the mode switch-over AHCI.Second thing, the performances of the Maxtor disc when  acoustic management is activated are pretty low!The impact at Hitachi is null, whereas it is already more significant at Western. We pass now to the copy of file. This type of information is of course interesting since if the sequential read gives an idea about the performances at the time when copying  large files, the things will be different with small files.The copy is done with two manner:1)within the same partition at the beginning of disc, 2) since this partition to another one  which begins with the half of the disc. The sequential flow helps a lot here we had found the Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 in the head .the Western disc is found behind the Maxtor .The impact of acoustic management (AAM) is notable in some  disc. In writing sometimes the passage to the AHCI does not arrange anything:it is in particular the case of the 7200.10 or Maxtor without AAM.The profits are on the other hand very significant on the WD5000KS. Without AHCI, the 7200.10 are in the head, but with it  the Western  takes the lead. the ACHI once again has a variable impact according to discs' since at Hitachi and Maxtor it is necessary to have the AAM activated to observe a light profit.On the other hand, Seagate and especially Western benefit from its activation in all the cases.The 7200.10 are fastest here. IOMeter is used to simulate the load in an environment multi user, in fact by using a load of the file server type made up to 80% of reading and 20% of writing the whole in manner random 100% on the disc.In this type the NCQ can be particularly useful. It is obvious, all the discs are not equal in front of the NCQ. For example, the profit is really not significant on the 7K500, that has been  already noticed on the T7K250. At Seagate the profit is light but it is on a disc as Maxtor that it starts to be appreciable.Indeed whereas it is in last position without NCQ, it takes the second place with.On the other hand, the WD5000KS, already at the head without NCQ, becomes straightforwardly untouchable when this function is activated because of the passage of controller INTEL in mode AHCI.¶ Here now what gives the Hitachi disc in the 4 configurations allowed for this test.The AAM has a negative impact in the performances, but it is noticed that as the number of concurrent orders increases this impact makes less.Oddly, without AAM and  AHCI, it is faster with 32 accesses than with 64 or 128. After the performances in our first applicatif test, the Maxtor disc again posts extremely low performances with the AAM, this time only when controller INTEL is not in AHCI.t The activation of the AAM on Caviar SE16 largely limits its performances under the IOmeter, especially if the NCQ is not activated, in this case the Hitachi disc is even faster. a For mono-user storage, the Seagate discs of 10è generation are rather well placed:they are rather discrete in rotation, and offer the most significant flows because of their density record.Seagate is moreover the only one to propose as a 750 gig disc . For a use within the framework of a disc system or a file server, our preference goes to the 7K500 from Hitachi and Western WD5000KS.If the 7K500 offers higher applicatives performances and more significant flows at the time of copy of file without AHCI, the Western exceeds it with the AHCI activated in this last case, is less noisy and offers performances largely to the top of the batch in an multi user. environment ¶Lastly, Maxtor DiamondMax 11 has as an advantage of being the least expensive, since u generally finds it with less than 250 € whereas it is necessary to count 280 to 300 € for  other discs of 500 Gig. his onlu advantage is it s accessiblility, u should also note the abnormally low performances when u activates the acoustic management.¶ xtreview is your : Video card - cpu - memory - Hard drive - power supply unit source we would be happy to answer for your question . if you have suggestion or comment regarding this review our support would be glad to help just join our forum and ask u will get the best answer to discuss check our forum section :-) RATE THIS REVIEW 1 2 3 4 5    / 5   View Stat

computer news computer parts review Old Forum Downloads New Forum Login Join Articles terms Hardware blog Sitemap Get Freebies