Harddrive advice

**Dillinger4** · Mar 16th, 2002, 01:13 AM

OOOOoooo A Pc forum.

Im looking
to scrap my IDE drive and get a new HD.
Size is not an issue. 15- 20Gig
is plenty enough. I need speed though.
10,000Rpm and fast seek times. What is
a good drive to by. Seagate?
Quantum? Someone said that IBM
makes a series called the deskstar that
uses platters with a glass subtrate
instead of the typical magnesium alloy.
Any suggestions would be great.

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 01:23 AM

There are no 10,000rpm drives that are in IDE format. There are some in SCSI however.

If you're looking for SCSI, there's no two ways about it-- Seagate is THE way to go. I wouldn't trust IBM drives-- their IDE sector isn't too hot, don't know if the SCSI is any better, but Seagate makes VERY good SCSI drives.

Or do you want any IDE recommendations?

**CyberSurfer** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:25 AM

I dunno, I've used and supported a lot of IBM drives, mainly deskstars, and I haven't had any problems as of yet...

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:32 AM

Originally posted by CyberSurfer
I dunno, I've used and supported a lot of IBM drives, mainly deskstars, and I haven't had any problems as of yet...

What seems to happen with the IBM drives is that they overheat and the platters expand, which causes the drive to fail.

If they are cooled properly most of the time they are OK. It applies to the 75GXP series very largely (IBM was sued over the 75GXP series) and partly the 60GXP series.

My friend's 60GXP died 2 months after he got it because his case cooling sucked. Mine has been chugging along since August just fine because I have a fan in there.

The 120GXP series solves this but opens up a new problem; the drives should NOT be powered on more than 8 to 10 hours a day.

And IBM Deskstar != SCSI.

**Gandalf_Grey_** · Mar 16th, 2002, 10:02 AM

I don't have money to spend on an scsi drive

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by Gandalf_Grey_
I don't have money to spend on an scsi drive

They aren't for consumers, they are for servers.

I looked into buying a SCSI drive for a boot drive but not only was a 20 GB Cheetah X15 like $200 but the controller was like $200, and they get REALLY hot, and they take up tons of space in the case...so i think from a consumer standpoint, IDE RAID would be better.

Sure, the IDE RAID would be slower, due to latency, but still near the speed of SCSI at a much lower price and much less trouble.

**sail3005** · Mar 16th, 2002, 10:09 AM

I bought a 7200 RPM 40 gig Maxtor about 2 months ago, and i have to say i have been completely satisfied. It's very fast, and very stable. i have never had any problems with any of my maxtors. Whatever do decide though, i definatly do not recommend buying a western digital.

**Gandalf_Grey_** · Mar 16th, 2002, 10:13 AM

I have the same hard drive 7200 rpm 40 gig Maxtor, i agree NO WESTERN DIGITALS, or fugitsu's

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by Gandalf_Grey_
I have the same hard drive 7200 rpm 40 gig Maxtor, i agree NO WESTERN DIGITALS, or fugitsu's

I have the 80GB D740X Maxtor, got you all beat

Yes I agree the D740X is nice and fast. Maxtors have low failure rates in relative to other drives. And in case it DOES fail, their RMA service is awesome.

I have owned 2 Maxtors in the past, one is nearly 2 years old, the other about a year. All are running great with no bad clusters or strange failures. So this is my third one and if I ever need another hard drive, Maxtor will be it.

**zmerlinz** · Mar 16th, 2002, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by sail3005
i definatly do not recommend buying a western digital.

why i don't have any problems with them, especially the caviar, they rock, but in my personal experience i have found that Fugitsu have been VERY good

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 11:00 AM

I guess it comes down to personal preference. However IBM is notoriously bad.

They are even getting sued over the 75GXPs.

**zmerlinz** · Mar 16th, 2002, 11:05 AM

yeah i was going to get two of those 120 gig ones from IBM but after i read that thing about them not being on longer than 8 hours i have changed my mind, not sure what i will get now

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by zmerlinz
yeah i was going to get two of those 120 gig ones from IBM but after i read that thing about them not being on longer than 8 hours i have changed my mind, not sure what i will get now

I'd go with Maxtor. You seem to like WD drives so get one if you wish. Seagates are decent, and very reliable also, but they are NOT good in RAID 0 configs.

**Gandalf_Grey_** · Mar 16th, 2002, 11:56 AM

CAIVAR SUCK! On my brothers computer there is a 4 gig caivar, It is going to die any day now, it is groaning like reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaarrrrrr,

**sail3005** · Mar 16th, 2002, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by zmerlinz

why i don't have any problems with them, especially the caviar, they rock, but in my personal experience i have found that Fugitsu have been VERY good

yeah, just personal experience. I had a 13 gig WD and it went out just a year after i bought it. I lost everything on it. I on;y had to format it a few times too, and it got very little use, at least compared to my maxtor of the same size.

**zmerlinz** · Mar 16th, 2002, 03:04 PM

ok so it seems i am the only person in the whole world who can use the Cavaiar range

but i am definantly not using IBM again

at the moment i have two segate drives and a western digital cavaiar

**sail3005** · Mar 16th, 2002, 03:09 PM

are segate good for IDE?

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by sail3005
are segate good for IDE?

They are a little slow, and they totally suck in RAID 0, but they are quiet and reliable. I don't see much of an advantage over the Maxtors though.

**Guv** · Mar 16th, 2002, 05:21 PM

I have always been in favor of multiple disks instead of one large one. It is more expensive, but very convenient for backing up your system.

Right now my primary system has three 40Gig Western digitals, and my second system will soon have three 20 Gig drives (previously on the primary system). WD disks have always performed well for me.

I put the OS (Win98 SE) and major applications on the first disk. All data files on the second. The OS swap file and backup images are on the third disk. I have partitions with some CD applications. For example, I can run Britannica & Rand McNally World Atlas without a CD.

As long as one of the three disks is functional, I will lose nothing. My C partition is imaged to both the second and third disk, while my D partition is imaged to the first & third. C & D partitions contain everything important.

I make images of my two critical partitions prior to any significant changes to the system. I even do it before defragging although I have never had a serious problem due to defrag.

Drives last longer with the above setup because it minimizes head movement which causes more wear & tear than almost anything else. It is also time consuming, but it would take a serious benchmark program to notice the increased efficiency.

I recommend PowerQuest Partition Magic & Drive Image, which I have used for a long time. I also recommend an obscure utility called Ztree, a handy file manager which does a lot of functions better than Windows Explorer and does some functions that Explorer cannot do at all. It is not a replacement for Explorer, but is very handy for the functions it does well.

BTW: My motherboard supports RAID 0, but I would not touch it with a 3.048 centimeter pole.

**nabeels786** · Mar 16th, 2002, 05:25 PM

ive had a WD 20gb for 3 years now and i havent had a problem at all.

i did have a prob at first with my old computers 10gb WD drive, but that was 4 years ago. its still chugging away today.

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by Guv
BTW: My motherboard supports RAID 0, but I would not touch it with a 3.048 centimeter pole.

It's fast, but not for reliability. If one cluster fails, bye bye to your whole array.

**Dillinger4** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:20 PM

Sounds like IBM dosen't have a good track record.

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:40 PM

Originally posted by Dilenger4
Sounds like IBM dosen't have a good track record.

They certainly don't.

So have you made up your mind yet?

**nabeels786** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:40 PM

whats raid 0 for? is that when you hook up 2 hds to be one?

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by nabeels786
whats raid 0 for? is that when you hook up 2 hds to be one?

Yes, but in addition to that it also doubles the speed (well theres also a latency penalty, so it's not a 100% performance increase)

You need 2 hard drives of the same size and speed though

**nabeels786** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:44 PM

oh ok, so i can put my 6 gb and 20gb into one..gotcha

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by nabeels786
oh ok, so i can put my 6 gb and 20gb into one..gotcha

No, they have to be of the exact same size and speed

**nabeels786** · Mar 16th, 2002, 07:58 PM

oh woops i meant "cant"

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by nabeels786
oh woops i meant "cant"

I thought that was what you meant but I wanted to make sure you understood.

**nabeels786** · Mar 16th, 2002, 08:07 PM

**Dillinger4** · Mar 16th, 2002, 09:34 PM

Posted by jpbtennisman
So have you made up your mind yet?

I think one of these will do. The lacie externals
looked cool but not very space saving.
They had a lot of GoldenRam Hd's

Ive never heard of them so i dont know
how good they are.

Maxtor Atlas V 18.3GB SCSI hard drive
18.3GB, 7200 rpm, Ultra3 SCSI (Ultra 160/m)
LVD 68-pin, 3.5" low profile internal hard drive
for PC or Mac

Maxtor Atlas 10K III 18.4GB Hard Drive
18.4GB, 10,000 rpm, Ultra3 SCSI (Ultra 160/m)
LVD 80-pin 3.5" low profile internal hard drive
for PC or Mac

**JungleMan** · Mar 16th, 2002, 09:40 PM

I wouldn't ever bother with a 7200rpm SCSI drive. the same performance can be obtained with an IDE drive.

Get the Atlas 10K-- but first see if Seagate offers anything similar at the same price.

BTW, you DO realize what SCSI means right? much faster speeds, but also more noise, more cooling required, expensive controllers, and expensive drives...

So don't get one if you aren't in a server environment.

**sail3005** · Mar 16th, 2002, 09:49 PM

Guv
I have never used backup images before. How exactly do they work? And how much space do they take up?

**Guv** · Mar 16th, 2002, 11:59 PM

Sail3005: Drive Image from PowerQuest compresses my partitions to about 70% of the used space. For Example, my C Partition has about 4.4 Gigs used out of about 12 Gigs total. The Image file is about 3.0 Gigs.

I used to get better much compression for my D Partition when it contained only data files. It now has a lot of applications software.

Drive Image shuts the OS down and runs in DOS mode. It then creates an exact (compressed) copy of everything, including the boot sector and the partition table. The restore process also shuts the OS down before doing the restore.

The Drive Image install process creates Rescue Diskettes to save your ass in case you have a real catastrophe. You can boot from the diskettes and restore your OS partition from an Image. You can also make rescue diskettes at any time after installation. I run a Multiple OS system, and the rescue diskettes have saved me a few times when I made a mess while installing an extra OS. The type of mess you can make with a multiple OS system can be almost impossible to fix without reformatting and starting all over again.

When I replaced my 20Gig disks with 40 Gig disks, I used Image files to reconstruct my system on the new disks. I first used partition Magic to create partitions on the new disks.

Since I already had backup Images of every critical partition, I merely had to do Image restore operations to the new disks. Otherwise, I would have had to make Images or use a Disk copy function. I installed the three new disks one at a time as a fourth disk on my 3-disk system in order to transfer the OS and other files. After doing the restore operations, I removed the old disks, installed the new ones, and booted the system. Bingo: Except for the extra Disk space, it looked exactly like my original system.

BTW: The Drive Image utility has a Disk Copy function which I have never used. As far as I know, it makes an exact copy of an entire disk containing multiple partitions. If the new disk is not the same size, it makes the new partitions proportional in size to the old ones. It copies the boot sector and does a correct job of generating a partition table on the new disk.

For backup purposes, I make Images of critical partitions prior to installing major applications, prior to installing new drivers for some device, prior to running defrag, prior to anything that I think might create a problem. I usually have 3-4 sets of images. If anything goes wrong, I restore from previous Images. I make images prior to installing new hardware (say a video card), just in case the new device fails or does not perform as expected. I am always in a position to reinstall the old hardware and restore my system. A few times, Drive Image saved me when I did something dumb while updating device drivers.

I maintain a system log recording all applications installs, driver updates, et cetera. The log tells me what software or drivers will require reinstall or update if I restore from an Image.

I have about 100 applications installed on my system. Reformatting and reinstalling everything would be a huge task. That is why I have a lot of extra disk space for images and use Drive Image. An extra disk (or two) for this purpose is well worth the cost.

BTW: I run without any virus protection software. I am careful, and if I get infected, I can always restore my system from the images. I actually feel safer this way. The damn virus makers seem to always be coming up with something new. I have never had to restore due to a virus, but one of my friends has used Drive Image several times due to infections. He runs Norton or McAfree (I forget which), and his virus software could not fix his system on at least two occasions, but Drive Image restored it.

**Dillinger4** · Mar 17th, 2002, 12:10 AM

That sounds pretty sweet Guv.
I love the idea of having a mirror
image for back up purposes
especially a compressed one.
What kind of power issues (if any)
did you have running multiple drives?
I would suspect that when adding
additional drives power requirements
go up. Would i have to get a new
power supply?

**Skitchen8** · Mar 17th, 2002, 12:19 AM

depends on how many drives you have, but your current power supply should handle a few more drives...

**JungleMan** · Mar 17th, 2002, 01:22 AM

Originally posted by Dilenger4
That sounds pretty sweet Guv.
I love the idea of having a mirror
image for back up purposes
especially a compressed one.
What kind of power issues (if any)
did you have running multiple drives?
I would suspect that when adding
additional drives power requirements
go up. Would i have to get a new
power supply?

What's your PSU now?

If you are going SCSI, yes you will probably need at minimum 300w, most likely 350 or 400 though.

IDE on the other hand, you can probably get by with 300. But 350 is preferable if you have a lot of HDDs.

Tygur · Mar 17th, 2002, 01:22 AM

Most of the hard drives I have are Western Digitals. They all work fine. Most just aren't used anymore because they aren't very big (<10Gig), not because they failed.

One hard drive (might've been a WD, I don't remember) did show signs of failing a year or two ago, but that might be due to the heat. The computer was in the same room as a coal stove with the thermostat set to 80 degrees Fahrenheit. Anyhow, after it was cleared out and transferred to another computer, it seemed to work okay. I believe it still works today.

I even have an old 1gig WD Caviar hard drive that still works from way back when 1gig was huge.

**JungleMan** · Mar 17th, 2002, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by Tygur
Most of the hard drives I have are Western Digitals. They all work fine. Most just aren't used anymore because they aren't very big (<10Gig), not because they failed.

One hard drive (might've been a WD, I don't remember) did show signs of failing a year or two ago, but that might be due to the heat. The computer was in the same room as a coal stove with the thermostat set to 80 degrees Fahrenheit. Anyhow, after it was cleared out and transferred to another computer, it seemed to work okay. I believe it still works today.

I even have an old 1gig WD Caviar hard drive that still works from way back when 1gig was huge.

While I can't second what you said as I've never owned a WD drive, I can second the fact that most makes of hard drives are as an overall pretty good (with the exception of JTS, may they RIP-- rest in pieces

).

Some people swear by WD, others don't. Same with Maxtor, Quantum (when they were in business), Seagate, IBM. I have just seen the fewest people complain about Maxtor, the most people say good things about Maxtor, and I have 3 Maxtors myself, so that's why I always recommend them (except in the case of SCSI where I will recommend Seagate Cheetah X15s

).

IBM, I own one, 60GXP, it's fine, but I would not buy another.

**sail3005** · Mar 17th, 2002, 09:33 AM

justin, you have never owned a western digital? I thought i saw one in your "rig in the sig" image..

Thread: Harddrive advice

Thread Tools

Display

Harddrive advice

In defense of western digital...

Re: In defense of western digital...

Posting Permissions