• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Grayhawk

  • Rank
  1. 888, thanks for putting the links up to all those reviews. I had seen some of them before, but as you note yourself only one of them is to a WDxxxxKS review. While there will propably be some similarities between the KS models and the enterprise models of the same sizes, I don't think that their test results are interchangeable (when the two are compared the RE/RE2 drives are usually better performing, but slightly more noisy). As I'm pretty set on going with a KS drive (either the WD3200KS or the WD4000KS) I wonder if the statement above still will be true if you add a 'KS' to those drive numbers? Since SPCR found the WD5000KS drive to be 'the quietest 3.5" desktop drive that we know of on the market today' I'm doubting that the 3200KS will be (measurably) less noisy than both that drive as well as the 4000KS. But since these drives haven't been compared to each other in tests (AFAIK) it's hard to tell for sure. Question: If 3200KS has 3 platters and 4000KS has 4 platters (for now), won't they have about the same density per platter and thus perform pretty similar? You mentioned something about different 'firmware strategy'. I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere else, is this commonly known or are you basing it on your own comparrison of the two drives? Do you have a final recommendation about whether to go with the WD3200KS or the WD4000KS drive? Thanks for your help
  2. Thanks for the replies! I haven't been able to locate many reviews of the WD3200KS and the WD4000KS drives, as most seem to be of the serie's top model with 500 GB. Can I expect both of these drives to have similar performance and noise levels to the WD5000KS drive? I'll be getting the parts for my new build soon - which of the two drives do you recommend?
  3. Thanks 888! As a rule of thumb: Less platters = higher density = better performance, right? (As well as: Less platters = lower noise levels and lower power usage.) You say the 320 GB drive soon will have 2 platters. Do you know how soon? You say the 400 GB drive will perform better. Is this true of both the 4 and 3 platter versions? Due to the fewer platters? If both sizes (also) can be had with 3 platters, they will be equally stable, cool, quiet and reliable, right? And the 400 GB will propably perform better? Is there any way to tell how many platters these drives have by reading their label?
  4. Some more questions: I can't find this on WD's site. Does anyone know how many platters there are in the WD3200KS and the WD4000KS? If there's a difference in platter density between those two drives, which is likely to perform better?
  5. X-bit Labs just did a '500GB HDD Shootout'. In their conclusion, they say: 'Western Digital: the two drives from this company were the stars of this review.' So I'm thinking about going with a WD drive instead of the Seagate 7200.10 I had planned for my next build. The questions: The enterprise drives (like the RE2 WD5000YS from the test) are priced pretty similar - especially the lower capacity models - to their SE16 counterparts and judging from the above mentioned test it seems they're a little bit faster. 1: Any reason not to go with an enterprise model? How about noise levels? 2: The RE2 WD5000YS seems a little faster than the SE16 WD5000KS. Would a RE WD3200YS have the same advantage over a SE16 WD3200KS? (Note, it's a RE and not a RE2.) In on-line shops here in Denmark I've recently seen SE16 drives show up with a different model number, being more expensive than the older SE16 models. For instance, I can get a SE16 WD3200KS for $118 and a SE16 WD3200KSRTL2 for $150. 3: I can't find the 'WD3200KSRTL2' product code on WD's site. Does anyone know what the addition of the 'RTL2' means?
  6. Grayhawk

    Seagate 7200.10 Review

    I went to a store today to see where their Seagate 7200.10 drives were from: One (250 GB) was Made in China and had the sticker on the motor and violet glue. Another (320 GB) was made in Singapore, had no sticker and green glue. As far as I can tell from this thread, the China made ones are more prone to noise issues. But there's also been some speculation that the drives with the sticker on the motor are a safer bet. Any thoughts?
  7. Grayhawk

    How to enable NCQ?

    From what I've read, you cannot enable NCQ if you haven't set your SATA drive to AHCI before the OS install. Does anyone here have any hands-on experience that either debunks or confirms this?
  8. Grayhawk

    How to enable NCQ?

    I'm guessing that the 51 views and no answers mean that no one knows?!? I continued my research and found that the 'Intel Matrix Storage Technology' is required for NCQ, even for single disk setups. I've also put together the parts and started on the OS install, after configuring SATA to AHCI in the BIOS (which accurately detects my Maxtor drive). But when I come to the part where it says 'Press enter to install Windows now', I'm told that no harddrive is found. I'm guessing that this means that you cannot install to a AHCI configured SATA disk, without installing the Intel Application Accelerator from a floppy during/prior to the Windows installation. Can anybody confirm this? I just find it strange and cumbersome that a brand new technology like NCQ should be utterly dependent on a legacy device such as a floppy drive (which I haven't installed in this rig...)
  9. Grayhawk

    How to enable NCQ?

    I'm about to build a rig using these parts: ASUS P5GD1 Pro with 915P chipset P4 540J 3.2 GHz 2x512Mb PC3200 Geil value RAM Maxtor Diamondmax 10 200GB SATA harddrive, 8Mb buffer Pioneer DVR 109 Leadtek PX6800, 256Mb Antec SLK-2650 BQE Now, how do I go about enabling NCQ? I've read here that something called AHCI must be enabled prior to OS installation for NCQ to work, and if it isn't, you must reinstall the OS and during that, install AHCI from a floppy? Did I get that right? Does that mean a floppy with AHCI drivers(?) is the only way to get NCQ, even when installing the OS for the first time, or do I have a 'one shot' chance of enabling AHCI in the BIOS before that first time OS install? Also, do I need the Intel Application Accelerator (which now only is for RAID?), considering this is a single disk setup? Any help is greatly appreciated!
  10. Gilbo, thanks for some great replies! I had already compared the WD 1200JB to the Samsung P80 and I liked what I saw. I also believe that you're right about it only being a few people who have problems with the noise levels of the Samsungs. So, for my current project of reducing the noise of my PC, the Samsung seems to be my best bet, especially as it even might bring a performance increase over my current WD 1200JB... If anyone here have any experience with the Samsung P80s I'd still like to hear about it.
  11. Spod, I'm familiar with and have also used this site's database to compare the drives in question. I wrote the retailer that had the ATA IV's on their site, and it turned out that they didn't have them after all. So instead I'm looking at getting the 120 GB, 8 MB buffer, Samsung SpinPoint P80 instead. My only concern is that someone at the boards have Samsungs that apparently are somewhat noisy. You can see the threads here and here. Does any of you have experience with the Samsung P80 drives? Any recommendations on which to get and which to stay away from? (I'm thinking which size drives are better performers/have less idle noise?) Btw, this general question still stands: 'In what applications will I notice a difference when going from a 8 MB buffer drive to a 2 MB one?'
  12. I'm not sure if my total configuration will have an impact on any replies to this question, but here it is: 2 GHz P4 Northwood on ASUS P4T-E w/ 512 MB Samsung PC800 RDRAM. 120 GB 8 MB buffer WD 1200JB. Visiontek GeForce 4 Ti 4400. SB Audigy. So, to take a real life example, I just started up the Far Cry demo, and it took about 65 seconds to load the game. What kind of increase in load times am I looking at when going from the WD 1200JB to an ATA IV? Is the 40 GB ATA IV noticeable faster than the 80 GB version? (It has a listed seek time of 9ms vs the 9.5ms of the 80 GB version.) In what applications will I notice a difference when going from a 8 MB buffer drive to a 2 MB one?
  13. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I recently got fed up with the whining of my WD 1200JB. Some time ago I build a PC for my mother using the Seagate ATA IV and was impressed with it's low noice, so now I'm contemplating getting a 80 GB ATA IV instead. I'm aware that the speed of the ATA IV never was it's strong point, but how will it's reduced speed (compared to my WD 1200JB) be noticable? I'm primarily using my PC for gaming and surfing the web.