liucangrui

IBM 40 GNX and Hitachi DK23EB-40 which one is better?

Recommended Posts

I am planning to buy a laptop harddrive.

but it's hard to decided which one is better.

IBM 40 GNX has 8M cache, Hitachi has only 2M cache but some people said hitachi has more advance technology and even faster then 8M cache IBM GNX.

so is anybody can give me some advice?

thanks :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the Hitachi hasn't been tested (or rather, I haven't seen the test results), I would say the IBM 40GNX is the one to get. The 8 MB of cache makes an impact in most applpications; the higher STR of the DK23EB only makes a difference in STR dependent applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't know what it is, you don't need it :)

STR = sustained transfer rate

That is, you are reading/writing data from/to your hard drive in a long continuous stream, as you might for audio/video editing. Basically, it is irrelevant for most computer users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A test at barefeat.com showed that even Toshibas laptopdrive with 16MB cache couldn't beat the IBM/Hitachi 40GNX 8 MB cache drive.

IBM/Hitachi is launching a 80GN - with sizes up to 80GB - and the 80GB version of 80GN supposedly could give the 40GNX a run for its money - but a safe buy now if you want the fastest laptop harddrive in retail is the 40GNX.

FDB motor, 8 MB cache, 5.400 rpm, 40GB - fast, quiet and big.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A test at barefeat.com showed that even Toshibas laptopdrive with 16MB cache couldn't beat the IBM/Hitachi 40GNX 8 MB cache drive.

I saw that... I'm not happy because I just bought a 16 MB cache Toshiba GAX. :( Fortunately, the IBM only beats it by a wide margin in one test (Random Write test). I have to wonder whether that's a caching anomaly, though. I have seen amazingly fast results with some benchmarking tests due to caching effects. It is very difficult to eliminate all caching effects unless you are able to issue commands to the drive at a low enough level (driver level, file system level, etc.) so that the OS disk cache doesn't interfere. I am not sure if Barefeats' testing has taken the necessary precautions to ensure that this is the case as Eugene has done with IPEAK/SPT. 'Writes' are very susceptible to such caching effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd assume the Hitachi would be slower. Interestingly I can find only one dealer offering this drive here, and this at a higher price than either the 40GNX or the MK4019GAX elsewhere; the 40GNX is apparently the cheapest drive.

Stephan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know the Tosh drive but since my laptop at work has a new drive - a 40GNX - the machine is noticeably faster than with the 4200 rpm drive it had. Nice drive and not at all expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not happy because I just bought a 16 MB cache Toshiba GAX.

it seems that Toshiba is not effective in its caching here, in particular that it separates the read and write caches, thus practically reducing the effectiveness of its cache to at best an 8MB cache with average caching code

Yéti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not happy because I just bought a 16 MB cache Toshiba GAX.

it seems that Toshiba is not effective in its caching here, in particular that it separates the read and write caches, thus practically reducing the effectiveness of its cache to at best an 8MB cache with average caching code

Yéti

I think all drives do this.. with the exception of CD-R/RW drives...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not happy because I just bought a 16 MB cache Toshiba GAX.

it seems that Toshiba is not effective in its caching here, in particular that it separates the read and write caches, thus practically reducing the effectiveness of its cache to at best an 8MB cache with average caching code

Yéti

Take that Barefeats test with a grain of salt. Like I said before, their testing is affected by write caching anomalies and cannot be considered to be fully representative of real world performance.

After using the Toshiba GAX for a while in my notebook, I can assure you that this thing is blazing fast, irrespective of whatever supposed caching deficiencies Barefeats mentions in their testing. It is much faster than the Fujitsu MHK2120AT that it replaced and much quieter in terms of idle noise. The actuator makes quite a racket, though -- there is much "clicking" going on... I hope it wasn't damaged in shipping. All SMART values are at 100%, though.

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