No reason to buy 3.5"

Silencing hard drives, optical drives and other storage devices

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
Posts: 298
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: Club Tropicana

No reason to buy 3.5"

Post by perplex » Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:45 am ... aptop_hdd/

After 2.5" HDDs such as these start being available, there won't be any reason to buy 3.5" for "silent" computer users.

*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2003 7:16 am

Post by nutball » Tue Dec 12, 2006 4:07 am

Well I can think of two reasons why 3.5" might still be attractive for some time to come:

- performance
- price

I think it's overblowing things a bit to say that neither of the above are important to any "silent" computer user.

Posts: 5085
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Location: UK

Post by jaganath » Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:05 am

300GB is pretty amazing though. It seems like only a few months ago 160GB was the maximum. I haven't even used up the 100GB I already have, so 300GB would probably last me for a very long time.

Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:32 am

Nutball is totally right even though his name suggests otherwise :wink:

I wouldnt buy one for my laptop for sure (not that I own one) mostly because they are physically higher than the standard 9.5mm and wont fit the vast majority of laptops, and because they are damned slow.

I would rather have a 160GB 5400rpm drive that fits a laptop, and have external storage for the rest.

It terms of achievement this is no miracle, the platter density has been increased from 80GB to 100GB but an additional platter has been added for the 300GB model.

The 200GB 2-platter model that is the standard 9.5mm high looks good until you get to the performance which sucks.


Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:40 am

Post by plympton » Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:41 am

But a slower, low-power drive is just awesome for HTPC uses - the original Tivo used just a 4200 rpm drive.. or maybe a 5400 rpm. Anyway, TV storage doesn't need a fast rpm drive, as it's just pulling large blocks off in sequence (that is, assuming you've designed the filesystem correctly...).

I'd take one (or 2) of these! :-)


Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:35 pm

Post by Longwalker » Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:25 pm

HTPCs are a niche use. A large niche, but still a niche. For general computing, performance differences between 2.5" and 3.5" drives are far from irrelevant.

Seagate's 7200.10 drives have an average seek of 8.5ms and will do a 78MB/s sustained transfer rate. None of the mobile drive makers even publish sustained data transfer rates in their specifications. Benchmark results land in the range of 20-40MB/s range. As for seek times, the typical 2.5" drive has an average seek of 12ms. These differences--especially the transfer rate--are very noticable in normal use.

Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Wed Dec 13, 2006 4:46 pm

"Longwalker" the useability will depend on the use and the user.

I wouldnt touch a 4200rpm drive with a 30ft pole, but a modern 5200rpm drive is perfectly useable for "non-performance needs". If your needs are performance based then performance is higher up the list than noise, and a quietish desktop drive will be fine, however a HTPC doesnt need a lot of performance so its not an issue at all.

I still wouldnt touch these drives myself, I would wait a few months for a "performance 5400rpm drive" :P to turn up with a 300GB capacity.


Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:48 pm

Post by crypto » Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:40 pm

HTPCs can require high performance hard drives. In some cases the HTPC may be recording from multiple HDTV sources while the user is watching an HDTV program and at the same time the HTPC may be flagging commercial on already recorded programs.

Post Reply