Main HDD Thread - (Discussion, Benchmarks, Brands, News and Advice)

Well if the 7200.4 takes 50% longer to complete a copy to copy of a folder it is then active that much longer draining high power. So in the end overall the seagate uses more power than the 7K500. Even at boot my 7200.4 was active for 45 seconds compared to 39 seconds or less for the 7k500(boot times to Desktop). Even at that we are talking well over 10% less usage.

Even at 10%, which is a conservative figure, you should see better results from the 7K500. I know my battey time reports with the 7K500 about 6 hours plus where I could only best at about 5:30 with the 7200.4. So in real world the 7K500 to me is way better...........

 

There's not much wrong with the power consumption of the 7200.4.

It's when you start copying files or installing the Hitachi can be almost twice as fast.

By the way, here's another good comparison: Tom's hardware.

 

Unless there is a typo, that link compares to a Deskstar 3.5".

 

It's a typo.

 

OK, then could you point me to the data that supports your "almost twice as fast" statement?

 

None of the benchmark sites published real world writing tests. We had a user on NBR who did, he was called Tilleroftheearth. He posted in several threads about it. The performance problems of the 7200.4 occur when writing. These data also point to that fact. The 5400rpm WD is outperforming the 7200rpm Seagate by a large margin.

Read performance of the 7200.4 is quite good but not as fast as Momentus XT or Hitachi 7K500.

Edit: to avoid that we will have this discussion three more times this thread has been added to the main HDD thread.

 

Do anybody know something on 7k750? They should be there in Q1 2011 but I see nothing