Tweet
I need some advice and I'm not too sure where to look, so I thought I'd post here. I'm looking to buy a new HDD. I'd like for it to be a SATA II w/NCQ and 16MB cache perferably...and 300GB, but the GBs don't really matter to me. The interface and buffer is what matters to me the most. I went to NewEgg.com and the only 16MB HDDs they have are Maxtor ones. In the past I've had problems with Maxtor. The IT guy at my work place suggests Samsung while my Housemate seems to think Seagate is good. I guess what I'm trying to ask/find out is which Brand name HDDs should I look into that have SATA II and a 16MB cache? (I could live with a 8MB cache if need be.) Thanks in advance.
-
-
Like the guy at your work said, look at samsung. Obviously you should go to a computer shop though and i'm pretty sure they will give you a bit more advice, since they know what would run the best on your operating system ^-^ -
Heh, I'm pretty tech savy when it comes to computers. I'm just not good with brand names, tis all. Preferably I'd like a 300GB SATA II 16MB cache with NCQ. BUT, I'll take a HDD as small as 200GB on a SATA 150 8MB cache w/NCQ if need be. SATA II is better than SATA 150, and a 16MB cache is a lot better than a 8MB cache. So I'd prefer to have the better of the options, but I will make compromises for the right brand. I'm afraid the computer guys at the computer store won't know as much...that they'll be dumb shits like the ones at Best Buy and so forth.Originally posted by MorrocoComment
-
First of all, SATA-II doesn't say anything in itself. It's not a fixed standard.
It was originally the name of the workgroup that was responsilbe for augmenting the exisitng SATA standard with stuff like NCQ, hot swapping, and a faster interface (3 GB/s vs. 1.5 GB/s).
The term SATA-II was picked up by several manufactures to promote their products. For instance, some manufacturers call their SATA HD's, which have a 1.5 GB/s interface, but are equipped with NCQ, a SATA-II HD, while others only support the faster interface and lack NCQ capabilities, and also use the term SATA-II to promote their product.
The workgroup now calls itself SATA-IO to make it clear that there is no such thing as a SATA-II standard, there is only SATA with a few possible extensions.
So, you are looking for a SATA HD with a 3 GB/s interface and possibly NCQ (not always a performance improvement). The 16 MB buffer doesn't do that much performance wise, but you might as well go for it.
On another note, there are no such things as good or bad HD brands. Every single manufacturer has had some bad HD series. Maxtor, Western Digital, Hitachi, all of them. Pay no attention to that. Just gather some detailed technical information about a selection of harddrives that meet your criteria (specsheets, reviews), and try to get an objective impression as to the possible durability and compatibility issues you could encounter from user reviews (browse some tech forums).Last edited by Fallen Angel; 06-29-2005, 08:14 PM.There's no place like 127.0.0.1Comment
-
I've only managed to come across one tech forum so far. I must not be entering the right keywords. And I was under the impression that if your mobo had SATA II that you could still use SATA 100, and SATA 150 as well. Hence the thinking SATA II being better than SATA 150 for it being a step up. Plus NewEgg has SATA II as an option to search for when looking at mobos and HDs...so...you tell me. I have to disagree with you on there being no such thing as bad HD brands, or bad brands in general for that matter. I won't dare touch a Western Digital HD unless I'm looking for a really cheap HD. And generally cheap means lesser quality. You can't tell me that WD is better than Samsung, Fujitsu, or Hitachi. Well you can, but I'd call bs.Originally posted by Fallen AngelComment
-
Western ditigal isn't better than any other brand. Some of their individual HD series are, like the Raptor series. Their first Caviar series (first 8MB buffered HD) was also ahead of the competition.Originally posted by Asmodeus
Not so long ago Hitachi produced a series of HD's that were almost guarenteed to fail. One of their earlier Deskstar series, which was affectionately nicknamed the "Deathstar" series.
It's never as black and white as you make it out to be. Excluding HD's from your search based soly on their brand names is kind of ignorant.There's no place like 127.0.0.1Comment
-
Not to go off track here, but I'm sure you buy brand name foods, clothing, shoes, games, cars, etc, rather than the generic brand, no?Originally posted by Fallen Angel
I've heard bad things about Seagate, I've had problems with Maxtor, I currently have a Hitachi Deckstar that hasn't failed me yet. You're probably right, it isn't as black and white as I make it out to be, but I seriously doubt it's as gray as you make it out to be.Comment
-
Well it seems that you know your stuff asmod, but i'd probably google it for some brand names.. I'm not good with that eitherComment
-
just echoing the "maxtor sucks" sentiment.Comment
-
Hahaha. Glad to know.Originally posted by suxxor
At least it reaffirms me into not getting a Maxtor drive.
Comment
-
Heh, I know my stuff about specs, and my experience with Maxtor, that's about it though. :P I still don't know which brand name is considered "better" today. Back then I knew to stay away from Western Digital and that their products are generally cheaper...but that's about the extent of my knowledge when it comes to HDD brand names and so forth.Originally posted by MorrocoComment
-
My 80gig Western Digital drive has worked flawlessly for at least 2 years now.Comment
Comment