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.

    HDD upgrade, questions! recomendations!

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by joystik, Jul 27, 2008.

  1. joystik

    joystik Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    So i've been in the market for a new hdd for sometime now. I've done a good bit of research too.. so please dont tell me to search!

    I'm upgrading from a 120gb 7200rpm, I was thinking about purchasing a 160gb 7200rpm WD black scorpio.. but have read that 320gb 5400 drives can be faster than a 160gb 7200rpm.

    So now i'm on the lookout for a perfect 320gb 5400rpm. Which would be my best choice?

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136197
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152111

    I've read good thigns about both, WD and Samsung. Thanks!
     
    joystik, Jul 27, 2008
    #1
  2. joystik

    joystik Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    ... I've seen HDTune bench on both, They are pretty simular, so interms of heat and noise, which one is easier on the touch/ears.

    Samsung or WD.
     
    joystik, Jul 27, 2008
    #2
  3. SoundsGood

    SoundsGood Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    188
    Messages:
    3,251
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Why not a 320GB 7200 RPM ?
     
    SoundsGood, Jul 27, 2008
    #3
  4. sgogeta4

    sgogeta4 Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,389
    Messages:
    10,552
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    456
    possibly due to the cost?
     
    sgogeta4, Jul 27, 2008
    #4
  5. mullenbooger

    mullenbooger Former New York Giant

    Reputations:
    298
    Messages:
    900
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    The 5400 drives can be faster but its not absolute. It depends on which models you are comparing. I'm not positive but i thought the 160gb wd scorpio black 7200rpm is just one platter of the 320gb version. Therefore it should theoretically be faster than any 5400 rpm drive if my assumption is correct. I haven't been able to find any benchmarks for the 160gb version of the scorpio black, would be interested to see it.
     
    mullenbooger, Jul 27, 2008
    #5
  6. joystik

    joystik Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    im not getting the 320gb 7200 due to the cost.

    My choices are 160gb 7200rpm scorpio
    or 320gb 5400rpm, since they're both in the same price range.

    As of now i'm leaning more towards the 320gb 5400, just deciding on which brand. Any suggestions?
     
    joystik, Jul 27, 2008
    #6
  7. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    The Scorpio is defenitely faster than the Samsung, but it also gets a bit hotter and uses more power. If you have a smaller laptop with a strong GPU that may be a problem.

    The Hitachi 5K320 makes for nice middleground:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145227&Tpk=5k320

    The Hitachi 7K200 200GB is faster than any 5400rpm drive and can be gotten for $99.

    If the Black Scorpio 160GB has one platter it will be faster than the 7K200.

    You can check the benchmarks here.
     
    Phil, Jul 28, 2008
    #7
  8. joystik

    joystik Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    wow! so that hitachi, beats both samsung and WD.. They're all around the same price range, I'm just not sure which i should settle with. Hitachi, WD, or samsung. Looks like Hitachi is winning the race...
     
    joystik, Jul 28, 2008
    #8
  9. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    If you're looking for maximum performance get the 7K200 200GB or, even better, the WD Black Scorpio 160GB if it has one platter.

    Edit: just checked it and WD1600BEKT is listed as having one disk in the specifications.

    So the fastest harddrives:
    1 WD3200BEKT, WD1600BEKT
    - Hitachi 7K320
    2 WD3200BEVT
    3 Hitachi 5K320
    4 Samsung M6
     
    Phil, Jul 28, 2008
    #9
  10. joystik

    joystik Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    joystik, Jul 28, 2008
    #10
  11. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    It is quick, i saw benchmarks. It is as quick as 3200BEKT.
     
    Phil, Jul 28, 2008
    #11
  12. Andy

    Andy Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,133
    Messages:
    6,399
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    206
    Well, yeah its quick, and it will show a 'huge' improvement in synthetic benchmarks and all, but not a not so 'huge' improvement in real-world performance....You have to find the bottleneck of your PC and upgrade or improve that..!!

    I am happy with my WD3200BEVT in legacy mode :D and I installed my mate's 7K320 to get a few benchies and didn't find much of a difference between the two..!! Its more about vanity I guess to get the best models with the fastest synthetic benchy ratings....!! :D
     
    Andy, Jul 28, 2008
    #12
  13. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Also keep in mind that your 3200BEVT is extremely fast for a 5400rpm HDD, and the 7K320 is not the fastest 7200rpm drive.

    The 3200BEVT/5400rpm also outperforms the Seagate 320GB/7200.3 in these benchmarks.

    And legacy mode does not matter for the performance :)
     
    Phil, Jul 28, 2008
    #13
  14. Andy

    Andy Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,133
    Messages:
    6,399
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    206
    Oh no, I remember it had a massive difference in the benchies....I will upload them tonight, since they are in XP's My Documents and I can't log out of Vista at the moment....!! But I guess my celeron may have been a bottleneck but his vista and xp were clean, since the drive was new, and I didn't really feel that it was like amazingly fast....maybe because I am already used to the BEVT and can't see a difference.. :rolleyes:
     
    Andy, Jul 28, 2008
    #14
  15. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    I am not saying 3200BEVT is faster than 7K320. 7K320 is faster sure. But 3200BEKT seeems to be even faster than the 7K320.

    So the difference in real life speed between 7K320 and 3200BEVT will not be as big as the difference between 3200BEVT and 3200BEKT.

    The latter is 10% when loading levels:
    http://techreport.com/articles.x/15079/6

    By the way, if you're mate could run PC Mark Vantage that would be very interesting :)
     
    Phil, Jul 28, 2008
    #15
  16. Andy

    Andy Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,133
    Messages:
    6,399
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    206
    I ran all of 'em for the 7K320 and I think my dad might get the BEKT pretty soon..!! I will upload 'em as soon as my torrents finish downloading.. ;)
     
    Andy, Jul 28, 2008
    #16
  17. joystik

    joystik Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    hmmm you guys are getting me confused again! So the WD 320gb 5400, or the WD 160gb 7200
     
    joystik, Jul 28, 2008
    #17
  18. joystik

    joystik Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    the 320gb 5400 seems to be really fast for a 5400.
     
    joystik, Jul 28, 2008
    #18
  19. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    Phil, Jul 28, 2008
    #19
  20. Andy

    Andy Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    2,133
    Messages:
    6,399
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    206
    Well, if you are going retail, then the BEKTs have a 5 year warranty, i think.. :D

    Stick with the BEKT.. :p But if you are short on space and budget go with the BEVT..!!
     
    Andy, Jul 28, 2008
    #20
  21. Phil

    Phil Retired

    Reputations:
    4,415
    Messages:
    17,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    455
    1600BEKT: faster and uses less power.

    3200BEVT: more storage, a bit slower, gets hotter and uses more power.
     
    Phil, Jul 28, 2008
    #21