Seagate and Western Digital 1TB Drives: Improved and Green
by Dave Robinet on November 26, 2007 7:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
PCMark05
We use the HDD
test suite within PCMark05 for further comparative hard disk scores as it provides
a mixture of actual application results and specific read/write percentages made
use of by these programs. The program utilizes the RankDisk application within the
Intel iPEAK SPT suite of tools to record a trace of disk activity during usage of
real world applications. We replay these traces to generate performance measurements
based upon the actual disk operations within each application. The HDD test suite
contains 53% read and 47% write operations with each trace section utilizing varied
amounts of read or write operations.
In PCMark05, we see a substantial narrowing of the performance gap between the Seagate and the Western Digital drive, though neither device fares particularly well against the competition. The XP Startup portion of the test is particularly brutal on our 1TB drives, putting the 7200.11 behind the 7200.10 and just barely edging out the 7200.9 competition, which Seagate markets as being two generations older.
The Western Digital drive finishes at or near the bottom in every test. While this result is not surprising given WD's focus on power saving features rather than performance, it is certainly enough to give pause to the average desktop user who would consider choosing this unit for a heavy multitasking setup.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
31 Comments
View All Comments
retrospooty - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
I for one found the article helpful. It isn't about showing performance and choosing a winner based on speed, it is about showing all aspects of each and letting the buyer decide. Some people might want pure speed, and some might want a low power, quieter option.I think logic is lost on some people.
gmyx - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
While 4w may not seem like much to a power user, it is a big deal to someone who is building a low power system such as a VIA based system. It's obviously not going to be used for playing games but can certainly work as a file server / internet proxy. When you can get a power supply with a total output of 60w (pico 60w power supply) every watt saved brings your total lower. A lower total mean less cost for your file server / internet proxy.Lonyo - Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - link
I would imagine it would also be nice for a low power home file server.1 of these 1TB drives would use probably <1/3rd of the power of 2x500GB drives, or ~1/2 the power of another 1TB drive.
If you have say a RAID-5 array with 5 or 6 of these drives, you're looking at a decent reduction in power which is always nice for a 24/7 machine.
Googer - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
Those who have wanted to use low power hard drives on a desktop motherboard have always had the option of using 2.5" laptop drives.Dave Robinet - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
Well put, Jarred.The Hitachi was reviewed some time ago, now, and (as you mention) its results are included in the charts. It gets mention in the conclusion as being the preferred option over the Seagate, as well.
The Green drive does have a place as a quiet drive (the quietest of the 1TB drives tested), and it comes at a low price point. That's considerable - particularly for HTPC users, who may not appreciate the Hitachi's noise.
For performance-oriented applications, though, it's a tough sell.
DigitalFreak - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
Me thinks that this whole "green" thing from WD is because they were having issues producing a performance drive. Maybe the lower power consumption would make sense in a laptop drive, but I'd much rather have performance on the desktop.Seagate's ATA drives have always been so-so performers, so I'm not surprised with the outcome. However, they 5 year warranty more than makes up for it in a home server environment.
jojo4u - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
Other drives are performing well. It's nice to have the choice. And there are uses for low-power high-capacity drives.jojo4u - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
See page 2 and page 3 http://www.storagereview.com/1000.sr?page=0%2C2">http://www.storagereview.com/1000.sr?page=0%2C2Your low-level results also back this up.
DigitalFreak - Monday, November 26, 2007 - link
There was a discussion on their forums about how it would be prohibitively expensive to produce a drive that could vary it's spindle speed due to the extra stress on the mechanism.Interlink - Tuesday, November 27, 2007 - link
Anybody with a mic e.g. in his headset and a PC with microphon input is able to measure the fixed spindle speed of a WD10EACS: [url=http://forums.storagereview.net/index.php?showtopi...">http://forums.storagereview.net/index.p...c=26021&...]5400 rpm[/url].