Hard drives, any faster these days?

[Aetherone]

Originally Posted by 3Tone

How is that soooo much slower than a normal 7200rpm drive?

We're not denying they're fast. The 7200rpm (black version) is faster on both sustained transfer and very importantly in rotational latency too.

Here's a handy review where the two drives are run head to head. http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1077/1/ Notice how significantly the black outperforms the green in pretty much every performance parameter.

[3Tone]

Originally Posted by Aetherone

We're not denying they're fast. The 7200rpm (black version) is faster on both sustained transfer and very importantly in rotational latency too.

Here's a handy review where the two drives are run head to head. http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1077/1/ Notice how significantly the black outperforms the green in pretty much every performance parameter.

Really? I say you're full of shit. I just happen to have a WD1TB Black as well.


Click to view full size!

Not much difference at all. Anyway I'm done in here. I have provided screenies, you guys have flapped your gums and provided nothing.

[Zenskas]

Provided more proof that you by the look of it...
A well known review site not good enough for you?
It's not a HUGE difference, but it's the difference between 7200 and 5400. Only 1800rpm difference which isn't a lot, but it shows in most benchies.
1800rpm is only 25% of 7200rpm, and funnily enough that's around the amount the GP looses to the majority of modern 7200rpm drives.

EDIT: If need be I can bench my 640GB GP drive against my 640GB Blue drive. They are like night and day...

EDIT2: Just look at these results: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1077/9/
It's almost exactly 25% behind, how can you say it doesn't run at 25% of the speed of 7200rpm (which is 5400rpm). It wouldn't be coincidence...

[3Tone]

Originally Posted by Zenskas

Provided more proof that you by the look of it...
A well known review site not good enough for you?
It's not a HUGE difference, but it's the difference between 7200 and 5400. Only 1800rpm difference which isn't a lot, but it shows in most benchies.
1800rpm is only 25% of 7200rpm, and funnily enough that's around the amount the GP looses to the majority of modern 7200rpm drives.

EDIT: If need be I can bench my 640GB GP drive against my 640GB Blue drive. They are like night and day...

EDIT2: Just look at these results: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1077/9/
It's almost exactly 25% behind, how can you say it doesn't run at 25% of the speed of 7200rpm (which is 5400rpm). It wouldn't be coincidence...

What part of I'm done here did we not understand? proof or STFU.

[Copie]

Originally Posted by 3Tone

What part of I'm done here did we not understand? proof or STFU.

FUCKING READ THE REVIEW.

[Zenskas]

Originally Posted by 3Tone

What part of I'm done here did we not understand? proof or STFU.

What Copie said.
I also have a GP and Blue drive and can notice transfer speeds are much lower on the GP drive.
Also like I said, going from a GP drive to a standard 7200rpm drive for the OS/games on a mate's PC yielded improved loading performance etc.
It's pretty obvious thy run at a slower speed, else WD would market it as a 7200rpm drive.
A drive that uses much less power than a 7200rpm drive while costing less cannot possibly be running as fast. That's like Intel releasing a CPU using half the amount of energy as another one in their product lineup but it's just as fast while costing less. Unless it's a newer gen CPU (like i3) to an older one (like Pentium D), it's not gonna happen.

[Copie]

Ive got 8 EARS and a 103SJ as my boot drive, the 103 is significantly faster then the EARS drives, it maintain writes over 100mb's both in synthetic benchmarks and just copying files normally.

Long story short, they arent 7200rpm.

[oaks101]

im using a Sata 1 drive for my windows 7 OS. its pretty quick for sata one, no difference between sata 2 really(friends pcs).

i would get a new 1.5tb

[dr_deathy]

Originally Posted by 3Tone

Really? I say you're full of shit. I just happen to have a WD1TB Black as well.

pix

Not much difference at all. Anyway I'm done in here. I have provided screenies, you guys have flapped your gums and provided nothing.

you better check out what seek time is.

maybe google it and why SSDs are fast, and why 10 000RPM drives are fast even tho transfer speeds are the same as a current 500GB HDD...

[Aetherone]

Originally Posted by 3Tone

I say you're full of shit

Interesting. Thanks to your vehment assertations, we now all know you're a petulant child who failed fourth grade reading and comprehension.

Originally Posted by 3Tone

Not much difference at all.

Well, except for the access time. 12.7 versus 17.4 which is (amazingly) ~25 percent better.
Thanks for providing your own data to prove our argument.

Although, why is your burst rate about half of what it should be? Is your system bottlenecking the drives?

Also, you REALLY should be trying to compare equlivalent drives - its perfectly possible that both your drives have the same number of platters inside with the 2TB having twice the areal density to achieve twice the storage capacity - this means at the same speed twice as much data runs under the head.