Samsung F1 750GB & 1TB Drives: Fast... and Silent?
-
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:07 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Looks like WD already did a silent update of the GreenPower 1TB to 334gb/platter.
http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-5294- ... 0D6B0.html
Worth keeping an eye on, at any rate.
http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-5294- ... 0D6B0.html
Worth keeping an eye on, at any rate.
-
- Patron of SPCR
- Posts: 744
- Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:05 am
- Location: London
- Contact:
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 7681
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
- Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
- Contact:
Mike C,FartingBob wrote:Lol yesterday i bought 2 WD 640GB drives. If id known the F1 was so quiet i might have gone for those. Oh well, the 640's arent slow or loud, and a big improvement over my current drive.
I'm looking at either the same drives that FartingBob just got or the F1 750 from this review. I know that you mention in your conclusion that
"we currently have a sample of the 2-platter [WD] 640GB model on the test bench"
and I guess I'm wondering if I should pull the trigger on the F1 750 in the next two weeks for a new build, or if I should wait for the review of the WD 640? I guess another way of asking is "Is the review of the WD 640 going up in the next two weeks, or should I just go with the info I have right now?" No pressure, just wondering
Thanks,
-Deliriou5
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12285
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Contact:
It's already been fully tested, but it's not the article I'm working on right now. I can tell you that it's very similar to the Samsung 750, tho the seek is slightly worse -- but nicely tamed with AAM. Without AAM, it's a bit faster than the Samsung 750, but with it, I haven't checked. Interestingly, the random access time of the Samsungs is faster -- 13.6ms vs 16.3ms on my test systems. I feel access time is the single most important spec for how fast a HDD handles on a desktop... but some people just want great throughput, and the WD is faster for that. If it was me, I'd basically go by price & availability, because you really can't go "wrong" with either. But for an OS drive, I'd probably favor the F1... and probably the F1 1TB. That's if you have the budget or need for such high capacity.Deliriou5 wrote: Mike C,
I'm looking at either the same drives that FartingBob just got or the F1 750 from this review. I know that you mention in you'r conclusion that
"we currently have a sample of the 2-platter [WD] 640GB model on the test bench"
and I guess I'm wondering if I should pull the trigger on the F1 750 in the next two weeks for a new build, or if I should wait for the review of the WD 640? I guess another way of asking is "Is the review of the WD 640 going up in the next two weeks, or should I just go with the info I have right now?" No pressure, just wondering
Thanks,
-Deliriou5
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 618
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 7:05 am
- Location: State College, PA
The idea that platter density and throughput are related in such a way that they would be equal for drives of the same platter size but different capacity sounds suspect. I would think that all other things being equal, the drive with more platters (or heads) has more bits available over a given rotation, and would therefore show greater sustained transfer.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12285
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Contact:
I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly. Is this comment directed at something in the review or in the comments here or...?mrzed wrote:The idea that platter density and throughput are related in such a way that they would be equal for drives of the same platter size but different capacity sounds suspect. I would think that all other things being equal, the drive with more platters (or heads) has more bits available over a given rotation, and would therefore show greater sustained transfer.
Upon rereading the section of the article, the moral of the story is to come down from the pain meds before posting article feedback. So I'll have to wait at least a week to read it again.MikeC wrote: I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly. Is this comment directed at something in the review or in the comments here or...?
The good thing is, according to my wife, I won't remember it. I'm inclined to believe her, as I also don't remember getting this bump on my head walking into a door frame.
I'll have the pleasure of reading the same new SPCR review twice.
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/ ... -11jun2008
Samsung is moving forward in its HD storage business with a couple of units based on the F1_3D design. The company has sent off a 750GB and 1TB unit to Silent PC Review where Mike the Chin.
Where Mike the Chin.
There Mike the Chin?
The Chin FTW!
Samsung is moving forward in its HD storage business with a couple of units based on the F1_3D design. The company has sent off a 750GB and 1TB unit to Silent PC Review where Mike the Chin.
Where Mike the Chin.
There Mike the Chin?
The Chin FTW!
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 1809
- Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 1:45 am
- Location: At Home
I hope the knock hasn’t left your head spinning too much, certainly less than 7,200 RPM.mrzed wrote:Upon rereading the section of the article, the moral of the story is to come down from the pain meds before posting article feedback. So I'll have to wait at least a week to read it again.
The good thing is, according to my wife, I won't remember it. I'm inclined to believe her, as I also don't remember getting this bump on my head walking into a door frame.
-
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:04 pm
- Location: Montreal, Canada
Comparison with P7K500?
MikeC,
I remember reading a while ago that you requested a P7K500 sample. Did you ever get it?
It would be an interesting addition to this comparison...
I remember reading a while ago that you requested a P7K500 sample. Did you ever get it?
It would be an interesting addition to this comparison...
can someone explain why the noise levels of this drive dropped in later articles ? e.g. http://www.silentpcreview.com/article909-page2.html
SPCR built a fancy anechoic chamberPeterT wrote:can someone explain why the noise levels of this drive dropped in later articles ? e.g. http://www.silentpcreview.com/article909-page2.html
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 12285
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Contact:
"testing now takes place inside our anechoic chamber" -- many of the previously tested drives were retested for noise in the anechoic chamber, which as a noise floor of just 11 dBA compared to 16~18 dBA in the earlier test environment. Naturally, the overall readings for all the drives dropped. The new dBA measurements are more accurate, because the ambient noise level is well below that of the noise produced by the drives themselves. In the past, the ambient was just too close to the drive noise itself, leading to higher overall measured levels.PeterT wrote:can someone explain why the noise levels of this drive dropped in later articles ? e.g. http://www.silentpcreview.com/article909-page2.html
Details of the anechoic chamber and test gear are provided here -- http://www.silentpcreview.com/anechoic_chamber_SPCR Check pages 10 and 11 for the quickest summary.
-
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:06 pm
- Location: East Midlands, UK
YMMV, of course... there are lots of reports of problems with Samsung F1s all around the net. However, it's also true that Samsung were first off the block with a high performance, 7200rpm 1TB drive at an affordable price, so there are probably lots of drives sold and people only ever complain if they have a problem.
My *personal* experience is that the Samsungs are great. My 1TB F1s are fast and quiet. I've had trouble with Seagates in the past, so I avoid them.
In all honesty, I don't get through enough HDDs to make a good comparative judgement... it's basically just superstition because I've only had two Seagates die on me and I've never had a bad Samsung - maybe they were just bad/good samples?
The WD drives are very quiet but they're also pretty slow with their 5400rpm spindle speed and the energy-saving head parking behaviour can lead to short delays as they wake up, which some people report can be annoying. I haven't owned one myself though as the slow speeds put me off.
My *personal* experience is that the Samsungs are great. My 1TB F1s are fast and quiet. I've had trouble with Seagates in the past, so I avoid them.
In all honesty, I don't get through enough HDDs to make a good comparative judgement... it's basically just superstition because I've only had two Seagates die on me and I've never had a bad Samsung - maybe they were just bad/good samples?
The WD drives are very quiet but they're also pretty slow with their 5400rpm spindle speed and the energy-saving head parking behaviour can lead to short delays as they wake up, which some people report can be annoying. I haven't owned one myself though as the slow speeds put me off.
what is the troubles you refer with samsung f1 seriesInfyMcGirk wrote:YMMV, of course... there are lots of reports of problems with Samsung F1s all around the net. However, it's also true that Samsung were first off the block with a high performance, 7200rpm 1TB drive at an affordable price, so there are probably lots of drives sold and people only ever complain if they have a problem.
My *personal* experience is that the Samsungs are great. My 1TB F1s are fast and quiet. I've had trouble with Seagates in the past, so I avoid them.
In all honesty, I don't get through enough HDDs to make a good comparative judgement... it's basically just superstition because I've only had two Seagates die on me and I've never had a bad Samsung - maybe they were just bad/good samples?
The WD drives are very quiet but they're also pretty slow with their 5400rpm spindle speed and the energy-saving head parking behaviour can lead to short delays as they wake up, which some people report can be annoying. I haven't owned one myself though as the slow speeds put me off.
a seagate 200 gb also gone in the past so not very warm to the seagate
yet they offer 5 years of warranty and not much complainers around
in the review they didn't mention much on 5400 speed because they say it is not all about rotation speed, yet when you try to copy 1 TB I am also curious how much it differs between 5400 and 7200
Noise and vibration comparison in review article is good http://www.silentpcreview.com/article927-page4.html
There are other reviews to be read
http://www.storagereview.com/1000.sr?page=0,0
http://techreport.com/articles.x/13578