Nil Einne

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Nil Einne

  • Rank
  1. Thanks Does anyone know if the 16 mb ones sometimes lack NCQ? I seem to recall reading something which suggested it but can't find it again. I thought it may be the datasheet but I checked and it doesn't suggest they lack it
  2. I'm buying a Seagate HDD while they still have 5 year warranty. The 7200.11 750GB appears to be one of the best priced of the 1GB and under range (1.5T is the best price overall) but most of those I can find are only 16mb ones. Is there much difference between them and the 32mb ones? My gut feeling is no, cache size doesn't usually make that much difference particularly with Seagate but would appreciate any feedback. Also if there is any reason to avoid the 16mb ones. (Of course a 2 platter one would be nice but they don't seem to exist or if they do not widely.) Cheers
  3. The 1TB drive has already been annouced BTW That particular buyer got in early and has a 5-year warranty! I posted my analysis of the authenticity of the pictures here: But you’re right, by the time it’s available for the rest of us, it’ll be down to 3 years. Unfortunately I live in NZ and it's actually a friend in Malaysia who's buying the HDD, neither places known for getting the earliest stock (in Malaysia's case even if they do it will have a large markup) so yeah, little chance of getting a 5 year one.
  4. What with 3 years warranty? No thanks
  5. It's easier from a technical standpoint to focus on a single-platter drive and get it working, with high yields, anytime you have a new areal density jump. From a consumer standpoint, it's always nice to have a range of capacities to choose from, but it's not always possible to time it right. If the single-platter is ready for shipping but the multi-platters aren't, do you delay the whole family or only ship the one that's ready? My gut says the lack of fanfare is related to having uncertain supply/quality. Make a new product, send it out to distribution and see how it fares. If the return or failure rates are high, it's easier to quietly make changes than if you have a huge advertising campaign and then have egg on your face. Or maybe the Marketing Dept had its budget severely scaled back. IMHO your first suggestion is the most likely one. Marketing wise, it doesn't make much sense to hype up a 500GB/platter drive if the only one you have is 500GB. Better leave it until you have the larger ones.
  6. I think there's a difference between what people think a manufacturer should do, and what manufacturers actually do. Generally speaking, most manufacturer prefer the hype. And as mentioned, AFAIK Seagate has tradiationally launched their high capacity drives first as a new product line. It's worth remembering that if you can only produce a few drives, as is likely at the beginning it makes more sense to sell these at the highest profit. Also, I suspect a lot of people don't know or care about how many platters a drive have. They may hear or think the 7200.12 is good and buy it. And the reason is more likely to be because of the hype surrounding the highest capacity then because the drive they're looking at has a single platter.
  7. Quite a few websites mention that. Some such as the Australian ones seem to have removed it. But I find that drive a little odd. Why only 16MB cache? Most/all of their current 7200.11 500GB drives have 32MB cache and even if the cache size isn't necessary the added cost must be minimal yet the marketing value is high. I’d be surprised if ST3500410AS is the correct model number for a single platter 500GB drive with 16MB cache. For many years now, OEM Seagate desktop-class drive model numbers have followed a uniform convention. Take, for example, the model ST31000340AS, which specifies: Seagate Technology 3½†1000GB 32MB 4-platter 0 [iD#] ATA SATA The ID number provides a means of differentiating drives with similar specs. The single digit used for the cache has progressed as follows: 2 – 2 MB 8 – 8 MB 6 – 16 MB 3 – 32 MB 4 – 64 MB? If the model number is correct, it could be a 64MB cache model. That would make more sense. I was looking into the model number thing myself but got confused and gave up.
  8. Nil Einne

    7200.11 500GB drive failures?

    Also it's quite likely he/she got them from the same supplier, indeed the same supply chain. You can have the best drive in the world it's not going to help you if your supplier throws them around like they're some sort of carbon nanotube. (Or if the user does.) Some of the many, many reasons of course why a report from a single user is rarely of any use in deciding if a drive (or anything for that matter, whatever the brand) is good or bad.
  9. I'm rather miffed about the warranty reduction but let's face it. None of the other manufacturers have brought their warranties of their entire desktop drive series back to 5 years like Seagate did. Either they're all incredibly dumb or it's only a small minority of us with which the 5 year warranty actually made a difference. Sadly I think it's the later.
  10. Sorry I forgot about the limited edit facility on SR... Anyway also wanted to say Also why launch a new line with only a single relatively low capacity drive (single platter drive?) From memory, when the 7200.11 lauched they launched with the 500GB, 750GB and 1TB and indeed the 1TB was the only one available for a while. The 7200.10 launch also hailed the arrival of the 750GB IIRC. So if this is a 500GB/platter series surely they'd be launching with the 2TB rather then the 500GB... Finally who launches a new series with such little fan fare? Usually you get all the hype and then 6 months later you can purchase the thing rather then the drive mysteriously showing up in stores without any annoucement.
  11. Quite a few websites mention that. Some such as the Australian ones seem to have removed it. But I find that drive a little odd. Why only 16MB cache? Most/all of their current 7200.11 500GB drives have 32MB cache and even if the cache size isn't necessary the added cost must be minimal yet the marketing value is high. In any case, it looks like few, if any will be 5 year warranty drives.
  12. Anyone seen or aware of any 375GB/platter 7200.11 drives other then the 1.5TB ones? The 750GB line in particular seems ideal for 375GB/platter drives. From previous experience I'm guessing, telling which is which is almost impossible without testing the drives but I'm wondering if they're at least out there. Cheers
  13. Nil Einne

    Apparently "I in VIP club"?

    Have to me too here. I had assumed the forums we're hacked and/or the admin account had been compromised but perhaps not. I assume the boards do have the latest version with all the security updates of whatever software they're running right?
  14. Nil Einne

    DVD vs CD for backup durability

    Have you considered DVD RAM? Also, when it comes to longetivity, one thing which is liable to affect longetivity is initial burn quality. You should do a quality test of a few of your burnt to get an idea what your burn quality is like. If it's poor, consider different media, different write speeds or a different drive. You might want to check out cdfreaks if you don't know how to scan media (only a few drives can do it properly)
  15. Been hearing these rumours for quite a while. Will be interesting to see if ATI still produces chipsets for Intel and how this affects Nvidia-AMD relations. AFAIK, Intel has already basically dumped AMD. Some people seem to think Nvidia is going to abandon the AMD market but this doesn't make much sense to me. It's not as if Intel is not competing with Nvidia in the chipset market as well (although obviously not in the discrete market). They will probably focus more on the Intel market and won't work as closely with AMD but I highly doubt they will abandon AMD. They already have a significant market share there so why give it up so easily? I also wonder how the branding will work. Perhaps ATI for the discrete and AMD for the chipset and if they do keep making Intel platform chipsets, probably ATI for that as well.