Barracuda ATA V announced

[time]

What are you on about, Prof? The acoustic specs of IV and V are identical.

 

[Prof.Wizard]

LOL. You're right!

But they changed them... :x
There is a new PDF for Barracuda IV. I used to have the original one! You can notice it by seeing the new Barracuda sign on the top left side of the 2nd page. The original PDF gave more aggressive sound levels for IV.

 

[Mercutio]

I'd like to direct everyone's attention to This Thread on SR, while pointing out that, at least according to Eugene's iPEAK tests, even a 13ms access time was being optimistic.

To Prof and Platform/Giant/Explorer/Splash - I don't know what Seagate is making nowadays, but it looks brown and stinky to me.

 

[yeti]

Mercutio,

if we are talking about seek times, then -for once- Seagate is only just a little off the mark: 9.3 ms vs. 9.1 ms, according to Eugene's WinBench measures.

Who gets a case (or however it's called in Strine) of what?

 

[Prof.Wizard]

I believe I've seen a spec of 9.4 ms floating around for the 120 GB unit actually, which makes the measurement even more dead-on.

Says all.
I wonder now what Merc will find to bash my favorite series of Seagate drives. 8)

 

[Mercutio]

If you look around SR's forums just this moment, you'll see HDTach results for a variety of next-gen drives, from WD, Maxtor and Seagate. Guess who is trailing the performance pack?

And yes, I misremembered the basis for the poll as being access, rather than seek, times. Not that I think the Barracuda V will be worth its weight in spit.

That's spit with a one year warranty, remember.

 

[CityK]

Eugene posted the raw results for the Cuda V in the database.

Cheers, CK

 

[time]

Well, that's the second published test, so this time I will gloat. Seagate definitely hit their specification with read seek times. I assume Merc had a brief brain fade and confused access time with seek time.

The model Eugene tested was a two-platter design. Seagate quotes slightly slower seeks for these, just as with Barracuda IV. Eugene measured 13.5mS access, exactly the same as WD's flagship, the WD1200JB. Less 4.2mS latency gives 9.3mS seek, and Seagate claims 9.4. Case closed.

Now for the negatives. :x

Just what the hell is Seagate playing at, portraying this as a "new" drive? It has 60GB platters, with a different sector layout to match. That alone would account for the trivial differences in benchmarks when compared to the Barracuda IV. The V can't even match the 120GXP, let alone be mentioned in the same breath as the 180GXP.

Talk about resting on your laurels. I can only find one attribute that's changed in any appreciable way: startup current. That's just as well, seeing the IV pulled an alarming 2.8A at spinup!

I know that Eugene's test shows greatly reduced idle noise, but that's not reflected in Seagate's specs, so I'd guess that perhaps the IV he tested was noisier than usual? It is impressive, however, to realize that his Barracuda V was nearly ten times quieter than his WD1200JB!

Given IBM's intention to offer a three year warranty on their 8MB 180GXP, I think I can already predict the new king of desktop drives, and by some considerable margin. Very nearly as quiet as the Barracuda, best seek time around (15mS full stroke), a whopping 56MB/s sustained data rate, way less power and therefore cooler running, and a three year warranty. Not to mention your choice of ATA or SATA. Western Digital better have something pretty dramatic in the wings ...

 

[LiamC]

But when time? When with the IBM's be available in Aus?

 

[Prof.Wizard]

Just what the hell is Seagate playing at, portraying this as a "new" drive? It has 60GB platters, with a different sector layout to match. That alone would account for the trivial differences in benchmarks when compared to the Barracuda IV. The V can't even match the 120GXP, let alone be mentioned in the same breath as the 180GXP.

Who cares, time?
I'll be buying the 120GB with the S/ATA (8MB cache) interface. That's the drive to beat... Quiet and performing. 8)

 

[CougTek]

I'll be buying the 120GB with the S/ATA (8MB cache) interface. That's the drive to beat... Quiet and performing. 8)

According to who? Except maybe for hopeless fish fanatics. The drive to beat, yeah right. 1 year warranty, slower than competition (of the same gen), ungrier on current and probably more expensive too if the past is warrant of the future. It won't necessarily be a bad drive, but the one to beat? Get real. Is your sky green or pink?

 

[time]

Prof, you really should read the 180GXP specs.

It has the same fluid bearing-motor system as the Barracuda, and is consequently just about as quiet, according to the quoted sound power levels.

It really does use around a third less power at idle - read the numbers.

And notice there is a three platter variant.

My point was that the 180GXP surpasses all known rivals in almost every attribute, and matches them in the others. It's been a long time since that happened. Hail to the king.

 

[Prof.Wizard]

My point was that the 180GXP surpasses all known rivals in almost every attribute, and matches them in the others. It's been a long time since that happened. Hail to the king.

Although I tend to like IBM drives, let's wait for results first. I have my hopes on this drive too, time, but... after the 75GXP everything IBM is so volatile I'm afraid.

And Coug... I prefer a 50% difference is sound levels and heat than 5% in performance... says all.

 

[time]

The 180GXP is three generations removed from the 75GXP, Prof. 60GXP reliability was reasonable, and by all accounts, the 120GXP is great. Let it go.

Actually, I've wondered if there's scope for debating IBM's response to the 75GXP problems, and whether or not they could have done it differently. Another time, perhaps.

 

[Prof.Wizard]

Another time, perhaps.

Time has no time?! :-? :lol:

Jeez. It's 4AM here. Need to get some sleep. Byez.

 

[James]

I see 200GB IBMs and Barracuda Vs appearing in online stores' pricelists. Does this mean they're available here already?

 

[Prof.Wizard]

Perhaps... what about the SATA version of 'Cuda V?

BTW: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/story.html?id=1034453001

 

[Tea]

(Keeping very quiet in this thread.)

 

[CougTek]

I see 200GB IBMs and Barracuda Vs appearing in online stores' pricelists. Does this mean they're available here already?

I'm not sure about the Barracuda V, but the IBM 180GXP's maximal capacity is supposed tobe 180GB, not 200GB. No idea why you saw 200GB hard drive from those manufacturers.

AFAIK, only Maxtor MaxLine Plus II and Western Digital WD2000BB & JB will feature 200GB capacities (for 7200rpm HDD, of course).

 

[Prof.Wizard]

SR's Results are out! 8)

 

[Prof.Wizard]

Conclusion:
The ATA-100 Barracuda ATA V is a package that delivers more or less what one would expect from Seagate's continued evolution of the series. Though it improves slightly upon the performance delivered by the 'Cuda ATA IV, the V is not a breakneck speed leader. It does, however, combine solid desktop performance (perhaps within a margin of the leaders that is all but unnoticeable) with unbelievably quiet operation. Perhaps the most exciting prospect, however, is the mating of this whisper-quiet functionality with the potentially leading performance of the 8-megabyte SATA version. We can't wait!

 

[time]

But when time? When with the IBM's be available in Aus?

Now. And there's already been one shipment of 8MB versions. Or so I've been told.