Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

17 Serial ATA Hard Drives Compared

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thu Sep 28, 2006 07:41 PM
from the kicking-the-tires dept.
TheRaindog writes "The Tech Report has an in-depth look at Maxtor's DiamondMax 11 hard drive that provides some interesting insight on how Seagate's recent acquisition can improve deficiencies in its own drives. More valuable, however, is the fact that the review offers a detailed comparison of 17 different Serial ATA drives from Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, and Western Digital. Performance is compared across a wide range of typical desktop, multitasking, and multi-user loads, and noise levels and power consumption tests also provide interesting results. Definitely worth a look for anyone in the market for a new hard drive."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Loud noises! (Score:4, Informative)

    by gr8whitesavage (942151) on Thursday September 28 2006, @07:52PM (#16239725) Journal
    These things are loud, especially under load. As quiet as rainfall and as loud as normal conversation? [lhh.org]
    • Re:Loud noises! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Reverberant (303566) on Thursday September 28 2006, @08:25PM (#16239985) Homepage

      The measurements were made one inch away from the drives, so you could expect the levels to be pretty high. Unfortunately, their measurement methodology also means that the noise levels are useless for anything but comparison purposes.

      It would be nice to know whether the levels were A-weighted or linear. Also, with the meter they were using, differences of less than 2 dB aren't meaningful.

      • It would be nice to know whether the levels were A-weighted or linear
        I would guess linear. Storage Review had a review of the drive I bought [storagereview.com] (guess I shouldn't have jumped at the first sub-$100 250G drive I saw), and they measured it at 40.7 dB/A at idle, as compared to Tech Report's 51.7. (My drive is a WD2500KS, a.k.a the Caviar SE16 (250G).)
    • not really (Score:5, Informative)

      by ElephanTS (624421) on Thursday September 28 2006, @08:25PM (#16239989)
      No they're not really. As a recording engineer and programmer HD noise is a concern of mine. My system has 4x Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 and they really are quiet. I've used Barracudas for about 5 years now and this choice was based on HD noise figures from that time. 5 years ago the Barracudas were the quietist thing on the market and beat the competition hands down. Seems like now all the brands are pretty good - actually I'm pleasantly suprised how much improvement there's been judging by the figures. An increase of 3dB is not very much under load and nothing to get upset about. Some of my older drives would probably come in at 60-65dBA which was too loud. My PSU fan has to be the main culprit in any acoustic noise generated nowadays. As for the linked noise centre guides, these are the standard examples given everytime I've seen and there's no way the Barracuda 7200.9 is the same level as a normal conversation. To get this figure they probably average in all the normal silence of speech too I would guess. The band 50-60dBA is actually quite large in terms of SPL - every 6dB gain represents a doubling in power, every 12dB a quadrupling, so it's quite a big range.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        You may want to check the 6 dB figure: Here is the wikipedia page [wikipedia.org]. It's a log scale, so every 3 dB is about a factor of 2 and every 10 dB is a factor of ten (the log here is base 10 for reasons I can't understand.
        • Yes, this is where it gets really confusing and I did put the wrong thing. I'm right if talking about dBV on peak to peak signals (6db is a doubling) but not right when talking about acoustic SPL. Good catch - it was in the back of my mind but only after I submitted it. As for the base10 stuff I think that's about perceived loudness.

          If you like this sort of thing here's another wiki about equal loudness contours (basically how our ears react to different freqs and levels - it's a whole more complicated stor
  • Well now, that is a lot of data to come up with
    Unfortunately, the DiamondMax 11's strengths don't really play to a big segment of the market.

    I was not too happy to learn of the merger~boyout, and while the article hints at optimism, I definitely get the sense of a rolling of eyes out there. Competition is what spurs creativity and success. We shall see.
  • Missing statistic... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by steve-san (550197) on Thursday September 28 2006, @08:01PM (#16239805)
    I'm in the market for one of these -- SATA 500, to match an existing RAID array. Unfortunately, these benchmark numbers just don't tell the whole story. While WD's 500GB RE2 has some of the best stats on the charts, the reliability reviews (at least on Newegg) are dismal. Sadly, this matches with my own experiences with WD.
    I'll gladly sacrifice a few percentage points of performance if it means increased reliability, especially when we're talking HD's. I already don't trust the things farther than I can throw 'em (thus the RAID-5).
    • by FerretFrottage (714136) on Thursday September 28 2006, @08:28PM (#16240003)
      Most people generally post when things go wrong or bad; very few seem to post when there is nothing wrong. You get a DOA drive, you're gonna bitch about it because it can't use it. I fit right there as well. I got a WD RE2 drive from newegg for my tivo S3 and it is working like a champ. It's quiet, fast and gives me 60+ hr of HD recording time. But did I post a positive review at newegg?...nope, I didn't. I was too busy using my new toy.

      • That might make more sense if every drive has bad reviews, but if one drive has reviews that are much worse than the others, it would be likely that there is something wrong with that drive.
        • I'd agree with in an fair and ideal world/system, but could users/companies (either the manufacturer or the end seller) be submitting more favorable reviews for products they want to push? I'm not saying newegg (or its users) does that, but it has been done before.

          In the case of the RE2 and newegg, I used the reviews as a guide, but when I searched the "broader" internet for people having problems with that drive, the "big" problem was just not to be found. As with anything and especially the internet, bu
      • what matters most (at least to me) is warranty and turnaround. At one time I went on a bit of a buying spree after losing a good bit of my6 data yet again to a single drive failure. In the lsat decade I've had two 80gb maxtors, four 160gb maxtor plus 9's, two 250gb plus nines, a seagate 80gb drive (which i sold right off because it was so damn loud) and a seagate 160. Of these, all but four (two 160gb maxtor satas, which i just put into service in the last month, and the two 250gb pata maxtors) have been ba
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        If that's the case, then why are 15 out of the 27 reviews for the RE2 posted as "Excellent"?

        In fact, Newegg is absolutely littered with thousands upon thousands of reviews from people who return to rave about their new toys... a bit to the extreme, actually.
        Go see how many HUNDREDS have come back to the site to post about their shiny new floppy drives, for crap's sake.

        Back to the point -- 15/27 is still bad (esp. after reading the comments about failure) compared to the competition.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      If it was a big issue, you'd be using SCSI.

       
      • by Sparohok (318277) on Thursday September 28 2006, @10:49PM (#16240989)
        "If it was a big issue, you'd be using SCSI"... that is so bogus.

        The SATA standard is entirely suitable for enterprise use and has a growing collection of enterprise class drives.

        Reliability is a "big issue" for almost everyone. Reliability is more important than raw performance for most of the desktop market, indeed most of the hard drive market. If SATA drives were inherently unreliable, they would be unsuitable for any market.

        The only reason reliability isn't the main benchmark for a drive is that it's so hard to measure or predict. If measuring reliability were as easy as measuring noise levels, it would be the most important buying criteria bar none. Particularly since other measurable criteria do not vary all that much between modern drives at a given price point and capacity level.
        • This has been bugging me for a long time now. I have googled the question a lot of different ways and not come back with any clear benchmarks. Is someone knows a link, please post it. If not, any slashdotter with access to a proper test lab and drives could generate the info.

          My Hypotheses is simple:

          1. What really matters for a RAID implementation is Reliability, Size, cost and Speed. In that order.

          2. SATA drives come close to SCSI drives in individual performance. Greater data densities help and lower spin
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            The standard isn't really going to make a difference. What matters is how good the processing device on the controller is and the read/write speeds of your drives. The SCSI array can be faster assuming it is set up correctly. Which one wins out will also be dependant on what type of environment you will be in. The premium on the SCSI hard drives themselves is justfied. Try looking for an comparison of SAS drives against SATA.
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          I work in a datacenter, for a company that has thousands and thousands of blades in our infrastructure. We primarily use HP blades, either the BL25p or the BL35p. One limitation of the BL35p is that the default configuration is SATA drives. The BL25p comes with SCSI.

          The difference is very stark, in terms of drive failures. We have a seriously disproportionate number of SATA drives fail, to the point where we simply aren't buying BL35p's anymore with SATA, they're just not worth the extra hassle from drive f
  • flash ram drives (Score:5, Interesting)

    by User 956 (568564) on Thursday September 28 2006, @08:02PM (#16239811) Homepage
    More valuable, however, is the fact that the review offers a detailed comparison of 17 different Serial ATA drives from Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, and Western Digital. Performance is compared across a wide range of typical desktop, multitasking, and multi-user loads, and noise levels and power consumption tests also provide interesting results. Definitely worth a look for anyone in the market for a new hard drive.

    It would have been interesting had they done a comparison with one of the Asus Z62F solid state machines that uses flash ram as a hard drive.
    • I'd like to see how the current crop of flash disks compare, in SATA, ATA and SCSI format.

       
    • Well, that would be great if you wanted to pay $1400 for a 32GB drive.
    • It would have been interesting had they done a comparison with one of the Asus Z62F solid state machines that uses flash ram as a hard drive.

      Why is this modded interesting? Solid state RAM drives aren't even close to being in the same market segment as SATA drives.

      I can summarize the comparison:
      RAM Drives are the best by a huge margin in every metric except for size

      Ram drives are:
      zero sound
      zero latency
      uber-fast seek times
      less heat output
      etc etc etc

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Remember FLASH drives degrade with repeated use. Ok for a digital camera - you can only take photos so fast. But for your important data? NAH! Ok. Upto 30,000 time seems ok, but run FILEMON (sysinternals.com) and you'll be blown away how frequently Windoze writes to your hard drive. All those silly background agents that many programs insist on installing (usually in the tray too) sit there and write to your HDD every 15 seconds.

      I'll take a reliable mechanical drive over a FLASH drive, thanks.

      (PS. Thanks fo
      • But for your important data? NAH!

        I suppose that depends on how often your "important data" gets written. I can think of lots of applications where flash degradation shouldn't be a problem. (And yes, I can think of lots where it sure would be.) I wouldn't put /var on a flash, but maybe /usr or root. Actually, I would love to have a small flash drive to boot from, so I could completely devote my disks to LVM.

        you'll be blown away how frequently Windoze writes to your hard drive.

        You'll also be blown awa

    • It would have been interesting had they done a comparison with one of the Asus Z62F solid state machines that uses flash ram as a hard drive.
      It would have been interesting had they done a comparison with a beowulf cluster.

      No, wait... what's that word that means the complete opposite of interesting?
  • Also included: a comparison of fireproof suits with shock wave absorbers.
  • by SuperBanana (662181) on Thursday September 28 2006, @08:19PM (#16239933)

    The Tech Report has an in-depth look at Maxtor's DiamondMax 11 hard drive that provides some interesting insight on how Seagate's recent acquisition can improve deficiencies in its own drives.

    Like better SMART support on Seagate's side? I was stunned at how much more SMART capabilities Maxtor drives have compared to Seagates and others. It should almost be a crime to produce a drive that doesn't have a SMART compatible error log (which Maxtors have- you can query it and see when+what the last errors were, for starters.)

    I've also been stunned at how BAD modern drives are; a client lost FOUR maxtor drives out of a 12 drive array in the space of 2-3 months, and we literally couldn't replace them fast enough (also, the idiots that he bought the system from TURNED OFF autoverify on the 3ware controller, didn't install the linux drivers, didn't bother updating the card's firmware, etc. That'd be PCs4everyone in Boston, FYI.) I had a Seagate PATA drive with barely a dozen hours on it that started clonking like crazy if you wrote data at high speed to it for too long (no, this was not the 7200.8, which had similar issues, relating to a motor driver circuit overheating. This was a 7200.9!) Seriously- the drive would completely stop writing data if you wrote to it continuously for about 40-50GB. The only thing that let me successfully complete the imaging was a borrowed fan directly cooling the drive.

    I'm not too optimistic that Maxtor and Seagate will benefit each other in terms of technology the end user will care about; what is more likely is that Seagate will go enterprise, and Maxtor will go consumer, since that is what each brand is best known for.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Maxtor drives are not reliable and I just wouldn't use them. Maybe this is why they have such detailed SMART stats? I don't know but just don't touch them. Great example of false economy as your story shows.
    • I've also been stunned at how BAD modern drives are; a client lost FOUR maxtor drives out of a 12 drive array in the space of 2-3 months

      I had a similar situation but I really think it was because the drives were not rated to operate in an oven - which is what a badly designed case with 16 drives ended up as. That said it appears I've lost two Seagate SATA drives from a newer machine in the last two days, both halves of a mirror. I'm happy I fed it a new drive yesterday or I'd be looking at a long restore

  • Besides price per Gig, my next main concern is, "How long will it last?". Throughput speed and power consumption are important but long life usually beats those criteria. Warranties don't mean much when your data gets hosed from a drive's early death. A five year design life is a nice thing to have but I'd be a bit more comfortable if their warranty extended for that duration.

    I've had mixed reliability results from both Seagate and Maxtor. Hopefully this union will take the best from both and result in
  • by eric76 (679787) on Thursday September 28 2006, @08:33PM (#16240043)
    So far, I'm not too impressed with SATA drives at all.

    Of the four I've bought in the last year and a half, two have failed. I've already replaced one and need to send the other back for a warranty replacement.

    Failure seem high on those SATA drives that other people I know have, too.
    • FWIW, the three drives I bought in a system upgrade about a year ago (two 2.5" Toshiba MK4032GSX's and a 3.5" Seagate ST3400633AS) have been doing just fine--though I did inadvertently discover that those little plastic ribs on the SATA connectors aren't quite as strong as you might expect . . . *snap*
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        though I did inadvertently discover that those little plastic ribs on the SATA connectors aren't quite as strong as you might expect . . . *snap*

        Mechanically speaking, the SATA connector doesn't seem particularly robust. I've had problems at work with one system in which the drive would occasionally disconnect and reconnect. Since the connectors use flat contacts that slide past each other and don't have much (if any) spring force behind them, it seems to me that you don't get as solid a connection as

    • Disclaimer: this is just one person's experience.

      I have a RAID5 array of 4 Samsung SP1213C (120 GB) SATA drives on one of my systems, which has been truckin' along for two-and-a-half years of 24/7 operation without a hiccup. These are running off generic SiI PCI adapters, with Linux software RAID. No errors logged in the SMART error logs, either.

      I've since put SP2504C single drives (250 GB) in a couple of my desktop boxen. They're too new (oldest=5 months) to assess long-term reliability, but I've had no tr
    • The last failure I had turned out to be the cable. I decided to give it a try after getting inconsistent errors on a full HD test.

      Be sure to try replacing the cable before deciding the drive is toast, even after testing. Those SATA cables are finicky.
      • You can't blame the technology for your lack of troubleshooting an obviously broken product. What made you think that a BIOS update would correct that problem anyway?
  • by Kohath (38547) on Thursday September 28 2006, @09:08PM (#16240237)
    Where are the 10K RPM SATA hard drives?

    As of a year ago, Western Digital was the only one in the market. We need more competition for this so we can get cheap fast hard drives. SCSI is too expensive.
  • Seagate. The end. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Travoltus (110240) on Thursday September 28 2006, @11:06PM (#16241129) Journal
    Who else comes with a 5 year warranty standard, on almost all drives?
  • When shopping for an additional drive for my linux box a couple of months ago I went with a Barracuda 7200.9 because of its low noise and low power consumption. At the time I was comparing the .9 with the .10 and found that the .10 had a 30-40% higher power consumption at the same capacity.

    I'm still amazed that the newer drive consumes much more power (and runs hotter in consequence) with not much benefits at the same capacity.

    Markus

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Actually, Storage Review is dying. It's only had two individual reviews this calendar year, plus one 'roundup' and one 'recap' review (as opposed to 12 reviews last year, and down from 56! in 2001.) I'm a big SR fan (at least, I used to be,) but it seems to have gone from a business to a hobby for the creator. You just can't rely on SR to provide timely reviews any more.

      As for the notion that they have already reviewed all of these drives? They haven't. Not even in the 'roundup' review.
    • I wonder about this, anyone want to chip in with some unscientific anecdotes?
      • by djdavetrouble (442175) on Thursday September 28 2006, @09:07PM (#16240233) Homepage
        Ok, I'll Bite.
        Over 400 g5's deployed at my site over the last 2 years, all with SATA drives. There has been only one drive failure so far,
        and it was premature so it was probably a bad unit or the movers roughed up his computer when he changed
        offices, because it coincided with that event. We had a bunch of the last edition of the grey g4's with maxtor
        hard drives that all seemed to fail within a few months of each other a 3 years back. We also
        had a run of bad Maxtors in a batch of small form factor Dell desktops. We lost about 10 in one month.
        Hooray for 3 year service plans !
        the "Super"drives are dropping like flies though...I keep a stock of replacements in the closet. Good thing
        a replacement with dual layer and lightscribe is around 60 bucks these days.

        This is all highly subjective and anecdotal and not meant to slander maxtor in any way :p
        • know what you mean about Maxtors - I find them dreadful. Good what you say about SATAs.

          As for the superdrives, they too in my experience seem to go wrong within 12-18months, generally on the burning side. As you say thank God they're cheap now and they're easy to get at.
          • by drsmithy (35869) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [yhtimsrd]> on Thursday September 28 2006, @11:43PM (#16241381)
            As for the superdrives, they too in my experience seem to go wrong within 12-18months, generally on the burning side. As you say thank God they're cheap now and they're easy to get at.

            I believe this has to do with the much weightier (relative to single-purpose devices) laser head arrangement that has the different types of lasers for each standard.

            It also has to do with what you use the drive for. Eg: a drive that only ever reads or writes whole discs will last a lot longer than one constantly being used for random accesses.

      • I've never had a problem with my 160GB 7200.9 Barracuda (SATA). But it's also sitting right on top of two exhaust fans (which exhaust directly out of the computer) and has never gotten over 25 degrees celcius. If you're wondering, the case is an Antec Overture II. The drive has a jumper that when closed limits the drive speed to 150mb/s, and when open lets it fly at 300mb/s. I've got it open, but my motherboard doesn't support the 300mb/s SATA. That could also be a contributing factor to the device's track
        • That 25 for the Barracude is so cool. My ATA version same drive is currently running at 43C in a fully loaded dual G4 MDD. I've always thought that was a little high but I've never had any problems with them though. The drives have practically no cooling in the G4 case which is a shame.