qwe123

Member
  • Content Count

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About qwe123

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Let's wait and see some real tests... It seems that lot of people find STR very important. It wouldn't surprise me if harddisk manufacturers deliberately sacrifice real-life performance in order to boost STR. I don't know anyone who does nothing else but reading large perfectly defragmented files or running HDTach
  2. There's also the fact that the 1TB F1 has three platters working in parallel... That's right, purely electrical head switch time is faster than the actuator having to move to another track/sector. On the other hand heavier head assembly due to more heads/platters could also mean slower access times.
  3. Just found this: http://www.hartware.de/review_791_7.html Inexpensive, but has the same performance like Spinpoint F1 1TB drive (750GB version is slower). Looks like a perfect system drive to me...
  4. qwe123

    320GB Platter WD Reviewed

    After reading the review I can only conclude that WD was more concerned about saving costs then about performance. Despite using new 320MB platters the real-world performance is comparable to older drives, if not even worse. That hints that WD was not only happy to save on platters but probbably on head assembly as well Samsung was not that stingy with the newest single platter 320GB SpinPoint F1: http://www.hartware.de/review_791_7.html It seems to be perfect candidate for system drive.
  5. There are wireless USB sticks with SMA connectors/detachable antennas as well, but even those without it is easy to modify and add one. Besides I can hardly imagine to go wardriving with the PCI card on a desktop PC (unless you mean by that stationary scanning in which case more appropriate term would be "warsitting" ). In any case what really counts is the chipset implementation and that has nothing to do with the interface. That is actually essential for wardriving.
  6. qwe123

    New WD 320GB/platter drives

    I guess it is even better to short-stroke a drive with better access times in the first place:) Access times as well as STR don't say much per se anyway...
  7. qwe123

    New WD 320GB/platter drives

    I agree, it's nice to have high sustained transfer rates, but what really counts is the behaviour with real applications. I hope the firmware is not optimized only for synthetic benchmarks Let's wait and see if someone comes out with thorough benchmarks. It's just pitty that SR itself is so anemic with reviews ...
  8. qwe123

    New WD 320GB/platter drives

    Just found it in a german forum: Single platter WD 320GB WD3200AAKS-00B3A0 is said to be "ultra-quiet", and even if you put your ear against the drive, the case fans are louder. HD-Tach Avg.-read(MB/sec): 90,6 Acc.-time (ms): 17,1 Burst(MB/sec): 240,0 CPU: 4% HD-Tune Min(MB/sec): 50,3 Max(MB/sec): 111,0 Average(MB/sec): 86,8 Acc.-time (ms): 16,3 Burst(MB/sec): 153,2 CPU: 5,6%
  9. http://www.wdc.com/en/company/releases/Pre...E-3EB19F6C62FF} If I got it right it seems they are updating existing models. Does anyone know how can one recognize the drives with new 320GB platters?
  10. qwe123

    read SMART for mau3147 w/2940u2w?

    Try this: http://www.stargaz0r.nm.ru/files/getsmart05b19.zip With this utility I was able to read SMART values from Seagate Cheetah 10K7 with Adaptec 29160N Controller. Most of other utilities cannot access SCSI Drives. Let me know if it works for you.
  11. qwe123

    Seagate 7200.10 Review

    I got one of those destroked drives (320GB), but when I compare the transfer rates here it looks more like it was a 400GB drive (I wonder if anyone has graph of a 7200.10 500GB model) I tried emailing Seagate and no one could explain that, until one day I received an email directly from product manager of 7200.10 line (what an honour ) and she told me that due to demand for lower capacity models they sometimes destroke higher capacity drives (no mention of failed drives ). She also said I gain higher performance from a drive with more platters and heads (a head switch time (purely electrical) is much faster than the actuator having to move to another track/sector). She didn't say anything about more heat and, at least theoretically, less reliable drive.
  12. I'd go with Gigabyte. Their latest models feature all-solid capacitor design (I think they are the only one to use them for all caps on the board). They are still manufactured in Taiwan (expect few entry-level models that come from China). If you are after extreme overclocking then you should look elsewhere, but then you can forget about reliability anyway. It is not possible to fit these two together. I've been using Gigabyte for the past 15 years, they make high quality and reliable mobos, but technical support is bad (well if I have to choose between the two ...) My experience with Asus is that since recent times they started to sacrifice quality.
  13. The replacement drives are mostly refurbished ones or drives with higher capacity with disabled platters/heads which failed. They probabbly didn't have any such a drive with 300GB drive capacity at that moment. They do repair/refurbish returned drives, but they don't give you back exactly your drive, these are probably different departments, keeping track of it is that what is expensive. Don't worry, there is no such a thing as a free lunch.
  14. qwe123

    Seagate 7200.10 Review

    Did you check S.M.A.R.T. values ? Do you have adequate cooling, this drive is known to run very hot. ^ My 320GB may be dieing as well.. Windows system log is full of pageing errors, and the seagate online test says both partitions have errors. bah.... this sucks! I have over 240GB of stuff on there
  15. qwe123

    Seagate 7200.10 Review

    Come on, is there realy anyone who can notice 1 or even 2 ms difference in seek time ? For 99% applications this is irrelevant, there are so many other factors. I prefer louder seeks, not because of the speed, but I simply need to know when is my drive seeking. When zero noise PCs become available maybe I'll think about it again. I suspect it's because PATA drives are still popular in the DVR market, where slower seeks are not an issue but noise is.