WD Caviar "Black" 1 TB & 750 GB "Fastest 3.5-inch 7200 RPM Drive on the Market"

Discussion in 'Storage & Backup' started by DiGiTaL MoNkEY, Jun 11, 2008.

  1. Gibbon

    Gibbon grumpy old man

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,513
    Location:
    2650
    This means they're not using the same size platters/density ... which was my point. Otherwise sequential performance would have to be the same (all other non-platter things being equal).

    See above :)

    If the 1TB is 3 platters/6 heads, then they're definitely 334GB platters.
    The 750GB either has to be using lower density platters, or some space is "disabled" - otherwise it'd be 833GB for 3 platters/5 heads (2.5 platters used).

    Interestingly, the max performance (disk to buffer) is the same for both drives, which suggests the density is the same.

    Maybe it's an 833GB drive in disguise :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2008
  2. OP
    OP
    DiGiTaL MoNkEY

    DiGiTaL MoNkEY Inverted Monkey

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    26,894
    Location:
    Melbourne, Victoria
    I "know" who it was...but more referring to the point of it not being stated on their site. :p Anyways its not uncommon for hard drive manufacturer to not use a side of a platter, until they make a platter size the is more flexible.

    Spec's from the PDF...

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2008
  3. Gibbon

    Gibbon grumpy old man

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,513
    Location:
    2650
    That's all good ... but my point was that you can't take a 3 platter/6 head 1TB drive, disable one head and end up with 750GB. You end up with 833GB (5/6 of 1TB) :)

    Unless, of course, the aerial density is lower on the platters of the 750GB drive (300GB instead of 334GB, which I doubt), or some capacity is disabled.

    Just a curious observation :)
     
  4. OP
    OP
    DiGiTaL MoNkEY

    DiGiTaL MoNkEY Inverted Monkey

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    26,894
    Location:
    Melbourne, Victoria
    Yep yep i got ya..hopefully some of the first reviews can clear the details up :D
     
  5. fad

    fad Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,555
    Location:
    City, Canberra, Australia
    I assume they will map the platters, and store some space for themselves as mappable sectors, for those uncorrectable errors.
     
  6. Sniper

    Sniper Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2001
    Messages:
    3,691
    Location:
    Mid North SA
  7. Bion1c

    Bion1c Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,223
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Note my reference to slower spindle speeds (and comments)- why would i get the green version?!

    I am all for fast drives, but i am cranky because this is clearly a marketing exercise. Obvious market segmentation, and yet another exercise is trying to squeeze more money out of enthusiasts for "valuable features"!! like dual processors?! wtf.. I'll wait and see what they release, but yes if the black edition costs a big premium over the samsung or others then i will go with something else.

    .. and btw NO i dont consider any 7200 sata drive "fast". i use 15k SAS drives in my main system
     
  8. banshee343

    banshee343 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,195
    Location:
    Perth
    4.2ms average seek? Seems rather fast for a 7200rpm drive!
     
  9. MichaelMR2

    MichaelMR2 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2002
    Messages:
    1,134
    Location:
    Sydney
    Oath...you saved me some typing :)
     
  10. seb

    seb Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    1,757
    Dear God, are you listening. I hate marketing.

    "NoTouch™ ramp load technology - The recording head never touches the disk media ensuring significantly less wear to the recording head and media as well as better drive protection in transit."

    Sounds like a car manufacturer with their "Two-Pedal™ easy drive technology. We took out the third pedal to give you greater control and comfort."

    Seriously, if a head ever touches a platter then it's good night nurse. DR Karl once explained that if it was scaled up so that the gap between head and platter was a few cm then the arm would be 6km long and the platter spinning at a zillion kph (or words to that effect).

    At least it comes with a 5 year warranty to match Seagate. I suppose my computer's only allowed to be on for a few hours each day but still.
     
  11. Bion1c

    Bion1c Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,223
    Location:
    Melbourne
    the 4.2ms is not the seek time, it is the average rotational latency (which is determined by platter size and spindle speed). this is the same as the 750gb SE16.. which incidentally has a published seek time of 8.9ms read / 10.9ms write.

    for reference a 15k max3147rc drive has 3.3ms read / 3.8ms write avg seek time...
     
  12. Rezin

    Rezin Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2002
    Messages:
    9,490
  13. Reaper

    Reaper Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    12,160
    Location:
    Brisbane, Qld, Australia

    It's called "park". ;) And instead of relying upon the rotation of the platters to float the head, it appears it will be permanently fixed height, so yea, no wear, much less chance of head/platter crashes, thus more reliable.

    Ok, I just read that link, and yea, they're still not fixed (makes a bit of sense now that I consider expansion), but the extra safeguards really are worth it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2008
  14. OP
    OP
    DiGiTaL MoNkEY

    DiGiTaL MoNkEY Inverted Monkey

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    26,894
    Location:
    Melbourne, Victoria
    Well thats marketing for ya....the graph is so big they can't contain the performance. :lol: Looking at the table i dont see how they beat Samsung?

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG]

    [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG]
     
  15. stergiopilus

    stergiopilus Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2002
    Messages:
    2,006
    Location:
    GC
    Haha, they get 1.7MB/s better in 'General HDD Usage' and get worse scores with the rest of the tests and they end up winning. :lol:
     
  16. meeetch

    meeetch Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    992
    Location:
    Wollongong
    Would it be a good or bad idea to make a vacume inside an actual hard drive?
    Wouldn't it reduce the resistance of spinning up since theres air inside there and air has resistance?

    Or is this just a stupid idea XD
     
  17. Reaper

    Reaper Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    12,160
    Location:
    Brisbane, Qld, Australia
    I was still under the impression that samsung were still slow like back in the cheap 500gb drive days of last year. I might still consider them then too now. But how are they for reliability? The warranty doesn't matter so much anymore as if a drive requires rma, then it's too late for unbacked data, and after even a year, it'll be more advantageous to just buy a newer, larger, faster, cheaper drive.

    I still like the extra safety and reliability features that will be in these dives though.

    http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/op/packAir-c.html
     
  18. Alpha2k6

    Alpha2k6 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,295
    Location:
    Sweden
    fast is a relative term, when a new Seagate 7200.11 is IIRC 30MB/s faster than the older 7200.10.. then i consider it to be *fast* in this case ;)
     
  19. OP
    OP
    DiGiTaL MoNkEY

    DiGiTaL MoNkEY Inverted Monkey

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    26,894
    Location:
    Melbourne, Victoria
    eheeh yah well marketing works... can't wait for some reviews!!
     
  20. Gibbon

    Gibbon grumpy old man

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,513
    Location:
    2650
    Has anyone seen any reviews of these drives??
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: