sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
But will it come with self-bricking features? I don't know if it'll sell without that.
WD to launch 2TB drives, lose data
- Thread starter Mercutio
- Start date
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
Why not multiple versions? Different markets have different feature needs and will pay accordingly. There are an extra couple of versions not really needed, but 7 is probably intended to replace the Vista versions, one for one.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
One nice thing about the Windows 7 SKUs: Higher versions have all the included features of lower versions. This means that Windows 7 Professional will have the DVD making and media center features found in Home Premium.
udaman
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,209
If you can degrade yourself enough down to 1.5TB, you can be ecofriendly, and have your Samsung favored 'reliability':
Samsung intros 1.5TB EcoGreen F2EG drive
http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/03/05/samsung.ecogreen.f2eg/
Samsung intros 1.5TB EcoGreen F2EG drive
http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/03/05/samsung.ecogreen.f2eg/
Stereodude
Not really a
Doubtful... The rest of the EcoGreen drives from Samsung are 5400RPM.
Stereodude
Not really a
Is that reason the outrageous price?For some reason I did not buy one.
ddrueding
Fixture
3 times as much as a drive twice as big? Doesn't seem too crazy for the bleeding edge...
Stereodude
Not really a
More like 2.5x times as much for a drive 33% bigger.
ddrueding
Fixture
I was comparing Newegg prices on WD drives from the same line. 2TB for $300, 1TB for $100.
ddrueding
Fixture
So a RAID-0 of 1TB 7200s backed up by a 2TB 5400? Sounds like a plan to me...
That does not increase capacity as much, not to mention the economics of a RAID controller. Alternatively one could split the 2TB drive.
I also noticed the WD15EADS (1.5TB) drive listed this weekend at a more reasonable cost/GB ratio.
Alternatively one could split the 2TB drive.I also noticed the WD15EADS (1.5TB) drive listed this weekend at a more reasonable cost/GB ratio.
Stereodude
Not really a
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Every Samsung drive sold in the US has a three year warranty. As I recall their warranty service is handled through an address is New Jersey.
Stereodude
Not really a
Regardless, they're all out to lunch. Seagate 7200RPM 1.5's have dipped as low as ~$100. Paying ~$150 for a 5400RPM 1.5TB drive is just stupid.
The WD 2TB is reaching retail volumes. http://tinyurl.com/clkmvx
Perhaps they will drop after a while.
Perhaps they will drop after a while.
Stereodude
Not really a
I wouldn't have spent the money, but it's quite a bit different from buying a 1.5TB 5400RPM drive for $150-$160 when you can get a 1.5TB 7200RPM drive for $~100-120. In the case of your Intel SSD, you can't get a higher performing SSD for 2/3rds the price (that I'm aware of).
I almost ordered the 1.5TB WD drive from the rotten egg. Fortunately, I waited and now see that they are up to the old trick of misrepresenting an OEM product as a retail one.
It is probably best to wait a few months and see what develops in large HD land.
It is probably best to wait a few months and see what develops in large HD land.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Who cares? OEM drives are sold without a data cable, a disc with some worthless software on it and no pretty box. They have the same warranty and are otherwise the same product as the retail units.
The only times "OEM" are an issue are CPUs, where OEM means no HSF and no warranty, and for products marked for a specific OEM such as Dell or Compaq.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
I have always preferred to buy retail drives because the packaging is UPS-proof.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I prefer to buy enough drives at once that I get manufacturer packaging anyway.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Both. I buy drives in quantities of 10 or 20 all the time, though.
The drive is fine. Transfer rates are good, starting at 101MB/sec. and decaying to about 50 (average is about 80 MB/sec.). That is more than my old Hitachi 1TB drives. Of course access time is high, typical for the 5400 RPM drive that it must be. It is fast enough for large data files and especially backups. These should be popular in building ever larger HTPCs etc.
ddrueding
Fixture
100+MB/s from a 5400RPM...who woulda thought.
Very basic and not entirely related question:
Lots of small files, copied in bulk, are copied sequentially, correct? As such, their transfer rate is closer to STR rather than seek limited, correct?
Very basic and not entirely related question:
Lots of small files, copied in bulk, are copied sequentially, correct? As such, their transfer rate is closer to STR rather than seek limited, correct?
Copy speed slows down with small files, but that happens with all drives. It is about half full and the speed is still very good, similar to the Seagate. I'm sure that perfomance will suffer when the drive is more full and when fragmentation sets in. I always use 32K clusters. The drive sure smells odd.
If stored sequentially then bulk copies will be done sequentially. However, if not stored sequential then bulk copies will not be done sequentially. Even a defragmented drive does not mean file1, file2, file3, file4 won't be stored on the HD as file3, file1, file4, file2 and in that case there will be seeks and everything will be seek limited..
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
Actually, I would think the opposite, especially if you're using a journaling file system. The more files that you copy, the more file system overhead.
Now with 64MB cache...
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=610
So the three I have with 32MB are obsolete?
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=610
So the three I have with 32MB are obsolete?
ddrueding
Fixture
How much does this cache cost, anyway? Why not 256MB? I'd guess the real-world performance would go up considerably.