dreamlayers

Member
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About dreamlayers

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Is there a reliability difference between the 32MB and 64MB Caviar Black drives? The 1TB Caviar Black with 32MB cache (WD1001FALS) has very impressive results in the reliability database. There is insufficient data about the 64MB drives here. On Newegg, the 32 MB drives have fewer 1-egg reviews than the 64 MB drives.
  2. Recently I got a Seagate 7200.12 1TB drive, ST31000528AS. I assumed that Seagate was still good because I had good experiences with them in the past and this wasn't a 7200.11. After the drive started failing in less than a month, did some more research and found that Seagate seems to have inferior reliability. You can see that in the review breakdowns on Newegg (lots of 1 egg reviews) and Amazon, and in the database here. Based on data here and at Newegg, it seems like the old Caviar Black drive with SATA 2.0 and 32 MB of cache (WD1001FALS) has the best reliability. The only disadvantage is that uses more power and heats up more. WD Caviar Blue and Green drives and the Spinpoint F3 seem to have worse reliability, but they're not as bad as Seagate.
  3. Other Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 160GB drives are listed but this one isn't. I've had it since June 2005 and it has worked flawlessly, without any errors logged. Manufacturer: Seagate Family: Barracuda Released: Notes: Model Name (product family): Barracuda 7200.7 Model Number: ST3160827AS Capacity: 160 gigabytes URL: http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=631c3b0c2aeef010VgnVCM100000f5ee0a0aRCRD&locale=en-US&reqPage=Legacy Interface: SATA 1.0 with NCQ Spindle Speed: 7200 RPM Seek: 8.5 milliseconds Buffer: 8192 kilobytes Density: 80 gigabytes per platter