The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    USB 2.0 External HD Vs. New Laptop Harddrive

    Discussion in 'Dell' started by b0r, Jul 15, 2007.

  1. b0r

    b0r Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    14
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    So, I have a 80gb, 8mb cache, 7200rpm External USB2.0 HD ready to go when my laptop arrives. My question is (keep in mind, the laptop will more than likely be stationary, and won't be travelling much) should I buy a 7200 rpm drive for my laptop..or would the USB 2.0 drive I already have do an equivalent job?
     
    b0r, Jul 15, 2007
    #1
  2. thegsrguy

    thegsrguy Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    24
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    The 7200rpm internal drive will make Windows boot faster, files copy quicker, etc...everything will feel faster with the 7200rpm drive.

    The external drive will be fast too, but USB and FireWire do have their limits.
     
    thegsrguy, Jul 15, 2007
    #2
  3. John Ratsey

    John Ratsey Moderately inquisitive Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,197
    Messages:
    28,841
    Likes Received:
    2,167
    Trophy Points:
    581
    USB 2.0 has a maximum transfer rate of around 25MB/s. The 7200rpm HDD might have a peak transfer rate around 40-50MB/s (I assume it is a 2.5" HDD). However, the peak transfer rate of your awaited 160GB 5400rpm HDD is also around 45MB/s (see the attached HD Tune plots) so there will be little benefit in putting the 80GB inside. You will lose half the space and gain a few milli-seconds in access time.

    John

    PS: I have now attached a couple of HD Tune plots for two different USB enclosures. The speed is a bit worse than I expected. However, I still think you would be best keeping the bigger HDD in the computer.
     

    Attached Files:

    John Ratsey, Jul 15, 2007
    #3
  4. b0r

    b0r Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    14
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Well, I'am a tech, and I'am aware of the transfer rates for both internals and externals, my real question would be..Has anyone run an external 7200 and an internal 7200 and noticed a difference that made you say "OMG, this is TERRIBLE". I may just hook up my old 5200 and see if it makes me rip my hair out.
     
    b0r, Jul 15, 2007
    #4
  5. chuck232

    chuck232 Notebook Deity NBR Reviewer

    Reputations:
    274
    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Wow John, those USB 2.0 transfer rates are terrible. The two USB 2.0 enclosures get about 25MB/s average and 27-28MB/s max. 16-17MB/s seems quite low. Shoddy enclosure perhaps? ;)

    b0r - I'm not quite certain what you're trying to get at. An external drive would be for storage, not speed - I doubt you'll want to run applications, much less the OS off one. Obviously a faster internal drive will help performance, but it depends on if you're more interested in space or speed.
     
    chuck232, Jul 15, 2007
    #5
  6. mini

    mini Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    1
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    mini, Jul 15, 2007
    #6