jpiszcz

Fastest HDD on planet?

Recommended Posts

I know what it is extrabigmehdi. It is just a superfluous term originally invented to address a specific problem. And it can only be useful in a single scenario: Where hard disk space is concerned and there is ambiguity.

For everywhere else, computer industry has been using Megabyte for ages, and i see use of mebibyte kebibyte or whatever out-of-butt inventions out-of-context and ridiculous. I strongely detest these and their use and see it just as a pretentious attempt to look cool.

Even if i have no notion of computers, i can quickly figure out what a MEGAbyte or GIGAbyte is. They are prefixes from beginning of times. Who is to know what is MEBI, GIBI or whatever? But more importantly, why is there any urge to use them now?

If there is any requirement to use this term in this context, please explain me how.

PS: This post is not directed at the OP. It is rather an expression of my frustrations from superficial inventions or their out-of-context uses.

PS: 15K scsis are not as loud as you think they are. It was no different than my 200GB Caviar (I had 15K.3).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, you can even see how OP is confused with "Seagate 1.5TiB HDD out" thread below with the use of these superfluos terms.

That drive's capactiy is not 1,649,267,441,664 bytes. It is 1,500,000,000,000 bytes. (Technically 1,500,301,910,016 bytes as per guaranteed sectors)

Was there really any requirement for using TiB? I don't think so at all.

Keep it simple people.

Edited by 6_6_6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@6_6_6

Who is to know what is MEBI, GIBI or whatever? But more importantly, why is there any urge to use them now?

For me Mib, means the "genuine megabyte", i.e the one that is a power of two, and the one I learned in school.

Many people buy hard drive , and are disappointed to see that under windows the capacity announced, is much less ....

For instance my samsung 500Gb hard drive, is in fact 465,65 Gb under windows, which is a bit disappointing

That drive's capactiy is not 1,649,267,441,664 bytes. It is 1,500,000,000,000 bytes.

Was there really any requirement for using TiB? I don't think so at all

It is even more misleading, then ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For instance my samsung 500Gb hard drive, is in fact 465,65 Gb under windows, which is a bit disappointing

And then you "lose" capacity to the way the file system works, to the way it is formatted, ... One should run software in the background that constantly recalculates the real, effective disk space you need. And CPU speed, really useful memory, etc etc etc.

Really, it's just a stupid way of saying things. Besides, these days there's usually printed a line somewhere on the disk 1 Gb = 1 000 000 bytes so... For most people it's just a matter of "more" or "less". 750 Gb is more than 500 Gb and that's all they need to know and care about. They've got 50% more capacity for x% more money. And those who do know and care... well they know. Except some who use silly expressions.

Personally I don't support systems with disks measured in GiB - I don't trust those freaky things. If anyone says they have such a disk, I'll happily sell them a real hard disk that talks Gb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@HMTK

And then you "lose" capacity to the way the file system works, to the way it is formatted, .

This is the exact size reported by the disk manager.

I can remove all partitions, or format in an other way, size will remain the same.

For most people it's just a matter of "more" or "less". 750 Gb is more than 500 Gb and that's all they need to know and care about.

That's just not consistent with how our operating system, or softwares report size.

I've even used a tool from samsung to format drive, and the size reported is in "true gigabyte",

not the fake size they advertise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Eugene

Claiming an HDD is the fastest based solely on transfer rates is akin to claiming an entire computer is fastest based solely on the memory transfer speeds.

What is missing then, access time ? It's a SCSI disk, and hence the access time is probably very good.

Edited by extrabigmehdi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@6_6_6
Who is to know what is MEBI, GIBI or whatever? But more importantly, why is there any urge to use them now?

For me Mib, means the "genuine megabyte", i.e the one that is a power of two, and the one I learned in school.

Many people buy hard drive , and are disappointed to see that under windows the capacity announced, is much less ....

For instance my samsung 500Gb hard drive, is in fact 465,65 Gb under windows, which is a bit disappointing

You have pretty much been brainwashed in school with useless terms or you haven't been properly given the context where they can be useful. Mega, giga, kilo are all used as binary, or a power of 2 in computer context. It has been this way since the very beginning. There is no point in reinventing the wheel with useless terms. Their use to replace what we have used since 20 years or for people to use them to look cool is utter waste. And everyone do not need to get schooling last 5 years to know what these silly terms mean but they would know what kilo, mega would mean even if they had no schooling whatsoever at all.

Mind you, they might apply in some context only to eliminate ambiguity. I haven't seen a single case where they could have been useful though. All i have seen is for people to use them wrongly or redunantly.

And you are getting a 465GB hard drive. Just because the hard disk manufacturer advertised it as 500GB does not mean it is so. Besides, everyone knows hard disk manufacturers use power of 10 and they mention this everywhere on their drives. People who don't know, would not know anything more with mebi kebi zedi or whatever. They would still be as clueless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@6_6_6

everyone knows hard disk manufacturers use power of 10

1 Mb= 1,000,000 bytes

1 byte = 8 bits

so it's not even a base of 10, it's a base of nothing

Edited by extrabigmehdi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Eugene
Claiming an HDD is the fastest based solely on transfer rates is akin to claiming an entire computer is fastest based solely on the memory transfer speeds.

What is missing then, access time ? It's a SCSI disk, and hence the access time is probably very good.

you do realize who 'eugene' is right? and how much he knows about hdd and storage technology?

besides, i think you are missing the point he wanted to make like the intended use of the drive etc. that determines the 'speed' of the drive for that job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@akmsr

you do realize who 'eugene' is right? and how much he knows about hdd and storage technology?

sorry for my noobishness, but from what I've understood, there's three essential statistics about a hard drive:

read & write speed (linear access) , and access time (random access).

Now I might miss other things ...

i think you are missing the point he wanted to make like the intended use of the drive etc. that determines the 'speed' of the drive for that job

great ... I've read so many reviews filled with boring statistics...

But not a lot of literature concerning "intended use" (go and figure out yourself).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are bringing in conversions between different units now which is not the case here. We are using prefixes. And in Hard Disk industry, those prefixes are powers of 10.

@6_6_6
everyone knows hard disk manufacturers use power of 10

1 Mb= 1,000,000 bytes

1 byte = 8 bits

so it's not even a base of 10, it's a base of nothing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@akmsr
you do realize who 'eugene' is right? and how much he knows about hdd and storage technology?

sorry for my noobishness, but from what I've understood, there's three essential statistics about a hard drive:

read & write speed (linear access) , and access time (random access).

Now I might miss other things ...

i think you are missing the point he wanted to make like the intended use of the drive etc. that determines the 'speed' of the drive for that job

great ... I've read so many reviews filled with boring statistics...

But not a lot of literature concerning "intended use" (go and figure out yourself).

You forgot the most important thing that determines the "speed" of a hard drive: firmware

The access time and transfer rates show only the physical stats of the drive, but not how well the firmware uses them. If you look at this SR chart , it shows the 15k.4 and 15k.5 . Despite the newer version having faster access, and higher STR, it shows that it is slower then the older version for *single user* benchmarks. So the newer "faster" drive (by specs) is actually slower in real-world usage (for single users of course).

What causes this? The firmware. In fact, SCSI drives are not the fastest anymore for workstations and single users, because their firmware is being optimized for multi-user server usage. That's why the server benchmarks show an increase from the older to newer drive. As a result of that, the single-user scores go down.

But even in regular SATA drives, look at the WD Black 1Tb and the Samsung F1 1tb drives. They have roughly the same specs, and use roughly the same platter densities. It's the drives firmware that really makes the difference in benchmark testing, since their physical specs are all about the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mega, giga, kilo are all used as binary, or a power of 2 in computer context.

That's not true. In networking, kilobits and megabits are and were always powers of ten.

I agree with you, that IMO Mebibyte and Gibibyte are unnecessary. (And I hate the sound of them. It sounds quite stupid.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mega, giga, kilo are all used as binary, or a power of 2 in computer context.

That's not true. In networking, kilobits and megabits are and were always powers of ten.

Indeed, and that's not the only exception...

  • RAM: binary
  • File sizes: typically binary (!)

But:

  • Disk: decimal
  • Disc: decimal
  • Floppy: binary and decimal mixed (!) *
  • Bit rate (networking): decimal
  • Clock rate: decimal
  • ...

* The floppy example is particularly confusing: 160 tracks/side x 9 sectors/track x 512 bytes/sector x 2 sides = 2880 x 512 bytes or 1440 x 1024 bytes = 1440 KiB - often refered to as 1.44 MB (which is soo wrong)

Good summary in the wikipedia article: binary prefix

That's why personally I think the SI prefixes should be used more often, to do away with the ambiguity. So I try to use the SI binary prefixes when I mean binary multiples - to be clear and precise (rather than "cool").

Note (ramblings):

As I've had a scientific education I also think the metric system should be more widely adopted - I mean, powers of 12, come on! Another example would be the physical keyboard layout: why are rows staggered nowadays? Or the logical keyboard layout: why are we still using an inefficient layout?

All of these issues just show that an arbitrarily made decision is hard to get away from, because men do not like change.

Edited by boli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding binary vs decimal prefixes in the context of this thread:

  • 1.5TiB hard drive is just wrong, it is a 1.5 TB hard drive.
  • 160-180 MiB/s STR does probably make sense, because the program used to determine STR likely used binary multiples.

Without specifying this you would have to know (or guess) which was meant (binary or decimal multiples) by context, which isn't always easy (as I pointed out in the previous post).

So I think it's better to define it. It doesn't help if the prefixes are used in the wrong way though. ;)

BTW, this just came to mind: I assume the cache on a harddrive is a binary multiple, for example 16 MiB. More evidence of the dual systems in use today...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now