PDA

View Full Version : What's the most robust hard disk ?


Byungsoo
20th November 2002, 03:22
I'm considering a new 100G hard disk and I will use that disk for
DV avi editing and encoding storage.

I have experienced a nightmare disk speed, which has been used for
only 3 - 4 months. It looks like hs's got the malfuction.

Anyway I need one more disk and robustness is the most important

- a new disk will undergo frequent creation and deletion of
big files (hundreds mega or 10 giga more)
- Usually I will not power off for 10 days and nights.
- I will not defragment disk frequently.

And of cource a normal speed is required under the above conditions.

What manufacture's do you recommend ?

Thanks in advance.
BS

-h
20th November 2002, 03:43
Stay away from Fujitsu. Far away.

I would go with the Western Digital WD1000BB, it is quiet and cool considering its performance, which seems to be what you're after. I would strongly recommend getting a HDD fan if you intend to keep the drive for a while. Also nice would be an IBM 120GXP, however a fan would be absolutely essential in that case.

The best reviews I could find were this (http://www.tomshardware.com/storage/01q3/010926/index.html) and this (http://www.xbitlabs.com/storage/wd1200jb/).

It will be very hard to find data regarding failure rates (apart from Fujitsu).

-h

sarahjh69
20th November 2002, 11:15
you might like to think about warrenty

seagate, western Digital, maxtor, quantum
have reduced to a 1 year warrenty now

IBM and Fujitsu still warrenty for 3 years

I would get IBM
(i'm sure fujitsu have sorted out their problems now)

Failure rates
I have had 3 Maxtor drives out of 7 fail between 1-3 years
all were replaced under the old 3 year warrenty period.
(now I would have just had to junk them)
I have 2 IBM drives.....no faults

I am under the impression that Seagate+WD+Maxtor are all
the same company selling with different badges.

TactX
20th November 2002, 11:55
My IBM-HD (40 GB, 5400 U/min) died suddenly after ~6 months.

I'd suggest buying a WD, with which I've always made very good experiences. My WD (80 GB, 7200 U/min) is also very quiet (much better than my IBM drive mentioned above)!

auenf
20th November 2002, 12:25
Originally posted by sarahjh69
IBM and Fujitsu still warrenty for 3 years


actually, IBM just dropped the warrenty of their 512kb and 2mb cache versions.

the only ide drives that have 3yr warrenty now are the special edition drives from WD (8mb cache) and the top line maxtor drives.

i wouls highly suggest you look at the wd1000jb or the wd1200jb or even wd800jb (actually the 80gb and 120gb are faster than the 100gb, only cause they use larger platter size).

and yes i do recommend IBM drives too, but there is only 1yr warrenty now.

Enf...

killingspree
20th November 2002, 14:17
that i've had 4 different ibm hard drives die in the last few years... they were all different models and/ or different sizes... now i've got a seagate and i've never had any problems!

still... i think ibm drives are a little faster...
just MHO

steVe

Arky
20th November 2002, 17:11
I currently have 2 IBM deskstar 120GXP (2mb cache) 80Gb drives, and 1 WD Caviar (8mb cache) 80Gb drive.

All of these perform very well indeed, but in future, I think I will stick to buying the Western Digitals again. Increasingly, I'm hearing bad things about IBM (which worries me not a little because of the amount of data I am currently storing on my 2 IBMs!).

The WD is also markedly quieter than the IBMs, which is nice.

I was also told recently by a computer dealer that Western Digital are known, in the trade, to be at the forefront of (IDE) HDD technology, whereas IBM still seems to have that reputation, apparently incorrectly, in the public eye.


Arky ;o)

diji1
20th November 2002, 17:38
Hi - I'm no expert, but I have never had a Seagate Barracuda model fail. Ever. The Barra 4's are damn near soundless and they run cool. If it was me I'd be stickin with that brand and range. That's just on me own experience though. In my country they are usually a tad more expensive, not that much more though.

IBM scared me away a few years ago ( or whenever it was ) with that batch of bad drives that came out.

Snakeisthestuff
20th November 2002, 19:01
Hi, i would by IBM in your case, cause i have my oldest IBM Hard Disk (15 GB) since 4 years and they had never any mailfunctions or other problems.... but heard from some friends of mine that they have problems with IBM Hard Drives so every medal has it two sides.

I can only write from my experiences with IBM i have 1x15GB,1x40GB and
2x80GB all from IBM and got never problems. and i power off my pc only if i really need to :) . i have also done much capturing stuff on my 40GB Drive, this means 20 GB Captures and then Divx Encoding and this for 295 episodes and no problems ever. so my next Hard Disk will be IBM too.

auenf
21st November 2002, 13:13
Originally posted by Arky
I was also told recently by a computer dealer that Western Digital are known, in the trade, to be at the forefront of (IDE) HDD technology, whereas IBM still seems to have that reputation, apparently incorrectly, in the public eye.

actually WD and IBM were technology sharing for a while.

and for the record i have 4x IBM drives (1 hungarian 20gb 75gxp, been replaced once, 2x philipino 30gb 75GXP and 1x 13gb 34GXP) and 1 WD drive, the WD1000JB. im happy with all of them, and the ibms works very nicely in RAID.

Enf...