WD6400AAKS released

[zeroneleven]

The WD6400AAKS is now in stock at newegg. Great price and free shipping.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136218

Just curious if anyone has run benchmarks on this yet? I'm waiting to see how the access time compares to the new WD3200AAKS.

Incidentally, I'm putting together a new "silent" DAW, and I had already bought the WD7500AAKS and WD3200AAKS with the "old" 160GB platters (mfr. date on the 3200 says Jan. 11 - just missed getting the B3 version). Would it be worth getting these newer drives for my build? I'm worried about the slow access time on the newer WD3200AAKS as a system drive.

[Fred]

The WD6400AAKS, it's certain to have the 320GB platters, is this correct? 'Cause I don't want to gamble for the 320GB model.

[JazzJackRabbit]

Thanks for the good news. Nice to see 320GB platter drives coming in. I want to wait for F1 640GB though. According to tests F1 1TB has vastly better seek times compared to WD 320GB. More than likely the same will hold true for 640GB as well, which would mean F1 would make a better boot drive.

[NeilBlanchard]

Hi,

I believe this is the single platter 320GB version:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6822136074

[zeroneleven]

Here are a few results I found so far...

From this thread:

Transfer Rate: (Read)
Min: 48.5 MB/s
Max: 118.2 MB/s
Avg: 89.2 MB/s
Access Time: 12.8ms
Burst Rate: 139.1 MB/s
CPU Usage: 1.2%

From another thread (in German), with more benchmarks and a review. Could someone possibly provide an English translation of the first post? The Google translate thingy didn't help much and it's been a while since I took German in highschool.



I'm glad to see access times are much better than the single-platter WD3200. I think I'll replace my WD 3200 and 7500 with 2 of these. Other than the fact that their reliability is yet unknown, would you recommend one of these for a system drive?

[Edwood]

Will there be a firmware update for the 320GB version to fix the slow access times?

I placed an order for one 640GB drive hopefully it's as quiet as the 320GB one.

[josephclemente]

This is great news. I thought I'd have to avoid WD's current generation of drives but it looks like I'll just have to avoid the 320GB model.

[dhanson865]

Hi,

I believe this is the single platter 320GB version:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6822136074

The part number on that page isn't specific enough to tell you what you'll get before you order.

Yeah, too bad they don't even seem to want to help consumers out with a proper new name for the new HDs.

I got some additional information today.

The full PN for 320GB off of this new platform is WD3200AAKS-00B3A0.

“B3â€

[JazzJackRabbit]

I wonder how come 640GB has so much better seek times than 320 one.

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3236

Average seek time of 320GB model according to AT link above is 16.3ms, however, 640GB model from zeroneleven post has 12.2ms average seek time.

[NeilBlanchard]

Hello,

Maybe the AAM is set differently by default on the 320GB?

[zeroneleven]

Will there be a firmware update for the 320GB version to fix the slow access times?

I placed an order for one 640GB drive hopefully it's as quiet as the 320GB one.

Is it possible for a firmware update to "fix" the access time? I thought it was more or less a fixed number?

Please let us know how your 640GB is (noise, temps, etc) once you get it.

Maybe the AAM is set differently by default on the 320GB?

I read in one forum that access time was 18.6ms with AAM enabled.

[ikjadoon]

I hear a fix for the 320GB is in the works; a newer firmware, most likely, maybe even the 640's.

~Ibrahim~

[dhanson865]

Firmware updates can speed up or slow down the r/w head movement. RPM of the spindle is a fixed item that it won't change.

Perhaps the problem is that access time is really a derived figure, comprised of the other positioning performance specifications. The most common definition is:

Access Time = Command Overhead Time + Seek Time + Settle Time + Latency

Unfortunately, this definition is not universal, and is made complicated by the fact that manufacturers refuse to standardize on even what access time's subcomponents mean. Some companies incorporate settle time into seek time, some don't, for example. And to make matters worse, some companies use the term "access time" to mean "seek time"! They really are not the same thing at all.

In the end though, when you are looking at the ability of a drive to randomly position, access time is the number you want to look at. Since command overhead and settle time are both relatively small and relatively similar between drives, that leaves the sum of seek time and latency as the defining characteristic between drives. Seek time and latency are a result of very different drive performance factors--seek time being primarily a matter of the actuator and latency the spindle motor--resulting in the possibility of some drives being better in one area and worse in another. In practice, high-end drives with faster spindles usually have better seek times as well since these drives are targeted to a performance-sensitive market that wouldn't buy a drive with slow seek time.

AAM settings can insert a deliberate/unintended delay before movement and/or slow down the rate of travel for the r/w head. Either way it reduces the noise and power usage some and slows down access time though it can reduce read errors and offset some of that time.

Since a lot of the settings are behind the scenes you can't just assume that AAM 128 on one drive means the same settings as AAM 128 on another drive even if they are made by the same company. Even if they have the same model number.

You should make AAM decisions on a case by case basis. Myself I set it to the performance level when I think about it as I usually do my best to find quiet drives with high performance to begin with. AAM does not affect idle noise and seeks don't bother me on modern drives.

[Anodyne]

NewEgg now has the 640Gb version for $129 w/ free shipping, I ordered one yesterday...that's not a sale price but the free shipping makes it more attractive. They're selling the Samsung 750Gb F1 on sale for only $10 more, but all the hullabaloo over that drive made me hesitant to get that one, the WD SE16 series seems to have more overall positive reviews (here and elsewhere).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6822136218

[continuum]

Is it possible for a firmware update to "fix" the access time? I thought it was more or less a fixed number?

There are some optimizations that can be done, but generally firmware updates don't produce huge improvements there unless AAM or something is on by default, or it's been tuned for something other than the fastest possible seeks by default-- e.g. WD's GreenPower "Intelliseek" or something-- IME, anyway.

Speculation is that TPI was increased as a part of the areal density increase, and due to higher TPI, seek times tend to suffer.

[Plekto]

It's also likely due to the thing having one platter versus two, which doesn't rely on the second platter to fudge the scores a bit. After all, two heads occasionally will work faster than one for some tasks.

What has me amazed, though, is the low noise and heat(93 F during heavy use!). That's nearly laptop drive levels, in fact. I can live with that in a 320GB drive in exchange for slightly slower speeds.

[fphredd]

So which would be quieter...this or the WD 750 Caviar Green drives?

[Edwood]

Just installed both the 640 double platter and 320 single platter in my system at the same time. They are both suspended. I cannot hear them over my main system fan at all, seeks are barely audible (I have to put my ear within a foot of the case). I am very impressed.

But this means the fan noise is bothering me. LOL, the HDD seek noise used to bother me more from my Seagate Cuda V's.

[fphredd]

I wonder if SPCR will be reviewing in the near term (have they already...link Please) to see if the Caviar Green drives still take the title of 'quietest we've ever tested."

[Plekto]

So which would be quieter...this or the WD 750 Caviar Green drives?

The specs on this appear to be quieter, mostly because of the smaller motor and head assembly(or at least that's my educated guess).

As for the seek times and such, it's clear that this thing has the noise management set to maximum by default, because in ultra-silent mode for the GP(once you set it and get it to actually stick, depending upon your MB/Bios), it appears to be about the same.

[nicko]

Does someone know when will this drive be available in Europe??

[Alex]

Does someone know when will this drive be available in Europe??

It seems to be available at many places in Sweden now.
http://www.prisjakt.nu/produkt.php?p=264236

[nicko]

Thx for the info. I guess I'll have to wait a little bit longer until it comes in Croatia...

[lobuni]

I hear a fix for the 320GB is in the works; a newer firmware, most likely, maybe even the 640's.

~Ibrahim~

how official is that info?
Can all the owners update their firmware or they will just ship newer drives with the better firmware?

WD download page

[zVp]

Any Canadians getting their hands on these?

[Anodyne]

Received my new 6400AAKS and installed it as my boot drive this weekend....actually I expected it to take a whole weekend but thanks to Acronis Migrate Easy it took me less than two hours (non-related plug...that's a great program!).

I replaced a Samsung 160Gb as my boot drive, I haven't used it enough yet to really test it out but I did run a few HDTune passes (numbers in parenthesis are for the Samsung 160Gb it replaced):

Min. Transfer Rate: 32.0 Mb/s (30.7)
Max. Transfer Rate: 107.2 Mb/s (60.2)
Avg. Transfer Rate: 86.9 Mb/s (48.3)
Access Time: 12.4 (13.6)
Burst Rate: 95.1 Mb (90.1)

Subjectively, I can't tell that it's dramatically quieter than the Samsung but it's certainly no louder. The loudest component in my case is the videocard fan and that kind of covers everything else up. It's running at 29 C., I think it went up to 31 under load while testing.

[Tomson]

So if the 6400AAKS has the same noise level as Samsung, then I suppose WD GP is still litle less noisy ...

Do you own GP to compare?

[Anodyne]

Nope, I don't own a Green Power to compare...and just to be clear, I'm not saying that the 6400AAKS isn't quieter than my older Samsung...I'm just saying, that with my setup, both drives are quieter than my VGA fan so I can't tell the difference in the overall system sound. I don't hear any drive noise, either idle or seek, over the VGA fan.

[ikjadoon]

I hear a fix for the 320GB is in the works; a newer firmware, most likely, maybe even the 640's.

~Ibrahim~

how official is that info?
Can all the owners update their firmware or they will just ship newer drives with the better firmware?

WD download page

Nah,nothing official. Just some stuff I've been hearing on some forums.

~Ibrahim~

[DG]

Any review with good sound measurements?