Printable View
What would some of the best hd's be in terms of operating noise, data transfer and reliability? One person i talked to said that IBM Deskstar's are good because the discs are made out of a glass substrate instead of a manesium alloy substrate. Another said that IBM hd's are crap. Then another said go for a Quantum Fireball or a Barracuda(which i think is made by Seagate). Any suggestions?
I have had the same Fireball for about 2 years with no trouble, as far as performance I'd say the new Western Digital SATA 10,000rpm but the ones with the 8MB Cache are good too (if you can't convert to SATA).
Ill have to check them out. I dont know much about hardware. I have an old mother board so think SATA would be out of the question. Right? :confused: Maybe even ATA?
15,000 RPM SCSI Drives. Mmmm mmm mmmmmmm.
Or you could go solid state ;)
Just using at home I am happy with 7200 RPM Seagate Baracudda
Cheers...
I don't think there's all that much difference between the main IDE drive manufacturers (WD, Maxtor, Seagate, IBM), except for a few series of IBM drives that were oftentimes bunk.
The "best" desktop drive ATM are the WD Raptor SATAs, but the cost per GB is rather high.
If you want quiet, get the Maxtor Diamondmax 9 drives. Plenty fast too, but the 8MB cache on the WD special edition drives give them the edge over other PATA drives.
I read an article that 8MB cache doesn't really helps you in home environement and its just waste of money...Quote:
Originally posted by siyan
I don't think there's all that much difference between the main IDE drive manufacturers (WD, Maxtor, Seagate, IBM), except for a few series of IBM drives that were oftentimes bunk.
The "best" desktop drive ATM are the WD Raptor SATAs, but the cost per GB is rather high.
If you want quiet, get the Maxtor Diamondmax 9 drives. Plenty fast too, but the 8MB cache on the WD special edition drives give them the edge over other PATA drives.
I also have Quantom Fireball HDD and works pretty well...
Personally I love Seagate so I will still suggest that and as far as SATA goes if ur motherboard suppots 150 MBPS bus speed and u have the connectors for that then that will be a good option...
Cheers...
Ill probably end up getting a Seagate. Unless i just keep this generic IDE drive that is in my parents computer and get myself a Apple G4 with a 80GB Ultra ATA/100; 7200 rpm drive. I also thought about getting a Lacie external HD. This way i can use it on my current computer then switch when i want to.
If I were you , I'd be much concerned at capcity first which basically depends on speed and noise . I bought WesternDigital 120GB . It's awesome 8JPP . It's fast , little noise . I've three OSs and 5 partitions (too mcuh :D ) . It's not quite cheap . Keep in mind that after two to three months the performance will be changed . So , it's doesn't matter which one you buy wheather IBM , Seagate . BTW , I've heard that Samsung are producing nice HDs . You better check there website and compare it to the others .
Macs are the biggest waste of money ever.Quote:
Originally posted by Dilenger4
Ill probably end up getting a Seagate. Unless i just keep this generic IDE drive that is in my parents computer and get myself a Apple G4 with a 80GB Ultra ATA/100; 7200 rpm drive. I also thought about getting a Lacie external HD. This way i can use it on my current computer then switch when i want to.
What would make you say that? Is it because of the high price?
High price, no software, 1 button mouse, kiddiest UI ever....there are a myriad of reasons but I won't get into them. Enough flame-the-mac threads have lived and died.Quote:
Originally posted by Dilenger4
What would make you say that? Is it because of the high price?
And I won't get into the speed issue.
But generally, there's very little that you can do on a mac that isn't better and cheaper on Windows/Linux
The only thing i can agree with you on is the limited amount of software available for macs. I can't see how an OS that has a simplistic user interface would be a bad thing. I also cant see how a mac would fall short in the speed category. So you mean to tell me that a computer running dual 1.42Ghz G4 processors with 2MB of L3 cache and up to 2GB of DDR SDRAM is slow?
Plus the macs run the latest graphics boards ie... ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, ATI Radeon 9000 Pro, NVIDIA GeForce4 Titanium.
Read this b4 anyone buys a new HDD...
http://www.zdnet.com.au/reviews/comp...67179-1,00.htm
Cheers...
simplistic isn't neccesarily bad (see GNOME), but bty kiddiest i mean the most "candy-like". I hated XP's Luna theme and I hate the OSX interface even more. Simple to me means efficient = putting shortcuts in c:\documents and settings\administrator and then using WinKey+R and typing the shortcut name to launch the program. OSX has too much graphical wizardry anyways.Quote:
Originally posted by Dilenger4
The only thing i can agree with you on is the limited amount of software available for macs. I can't see how an OS that has a simplistic user interface would be a bad thing. I also cant see how a mac would fall short in the speed category. So you mean to tell me that a computer running dual 1.42Ghz G4 processors with 2MB of L3 cache and up to 2GB of DDR SDRAM is slow?
Plus the macs run the latest graphics boards ie... ATI Radeon 9700 Pro, ATI Radeon 9000 Pro, NVIDIA GeForce4 Titanium.
I never said that macs were slow. But, for a Mac that decked out, I could get dual Opteron 244/Xeon 3.06 and mop the floor. Granted, I'd need a chipset that does AGP to compete in the 3D world, but i'm sure someone will accomodate that soon. In any case I could just get a dual AthlonMP/P4 system and ATI FireGLX1 and mop the floor anyways....I'll say it now. Dollar for dollar, mac performance blows.
None of those cards are the "latest". I'm not sure how ATI's driver model is at the moment but they could probably fit a 9800Pro in there...
But graphics cards aren't really a concern when the architecture is so different.
Perhaps. But a dual Opteron 244/Xeon 3.06, ATI FireGLX1 system seemed to be a bit pricy. At least on www.voodoocomputers.com What do you think about their computers?Quote:
Originally posted by siyan
But, for a Mac that decked out, I could get dual Opteron 244/Xeon 3.06 and mop the floor.
OSX > Mac OS. Infinitely. It's changed a lot of previously anti-Mac people's impressions (including mine).
The Apple hardware has nearly always been superior to PC, just more expensive. the OS always let it down though.
The Mac you laid out will probably be pricier.Quote:
Originally posted by Dilenger4
Perhaps. But a dual Opteron 244/Xeon 3.06, ATI FireGLX1 system seemed to be a bit pricy. At least on www.voodoocomputers.com What do you think about their computers?
The Opteron 244 is ridiculously expensive at the moment, yes, raking in about $900 CDN each, but thats only cause its a top of the line chip. the 240 is something liek $440 CDN.
Give it a month or two and hte 244s will drop significantly, and even now Dual 240s would be plenty fast anyways.
But still, it holds that dollar for dollar PCs have better performance.
Whats this ATI FireGLX1 Pro with 256Mb ram. I configured a Voodoo F5 with that video card and the price jumped by like $650.00. :eek:
its a very high end workstation 3d card. used for 3d graphics, mechanical modelling, etc...Quote:
Originally posted by Dilenger4
Whats this ATI FireGLX1 Pro with 256Mb ram. I configured a Voodoo F5 with that video card and the price jumped by like $650.00. :eek: