Seagate Momentus XT Hybrid HDD w/ built-in 4GB SSD

thanks for the great explanation! wow!

So, for his 500GB (2 250GB platters) and my 320 (a 250 GB + the left over on another) in our setup, which is just one huge partition, we wont see a difference right?

Just so i understand it, if i were to setup it up like you linked we would see a difference, but just standard usage like we have, our current setup will just be imaged over, then it wont matter? I have been thinking all day about the 250GB, but my vendor couldnt get it and offered me the 320GB for $3 more so I couldnt pass it up.

Overall, as a regular guy using this in my work machine, will i see a difference?

 

Two new identical machines side by side will show little performance difference between two 7200 RPM drives with one being 500 and the other 320 GB. As the system gets used a bit and data accumulates these standard HDD's will show a bit of difference. The one advantage of the HYBRID is the NAND will cache alot of the program and game files so you actually would see less of a disparity between the two drives.

 

Well, I would be hard pressed to say anyone is a 'regular' guy - we each want/expect different things from our systems. But, yeah I know what you mean; I don't think this would be as beneficial for you when the work involved is taken into account.

I also don't think that you will see the difference between the 250 vs. the 320 vs. the 500GB models with a single partition (default install).

But, let's put it this way: when other 'enthusiasts' see my systems running, they guess they're above their own. They find it hard to believe though that it is mostly a setup/maintenance issue - not a brute force 'superior' hardware issue that is showing such a difference. There have been many times when the hardware they had was obviously superior to mine - yet my system was not only more responsive, but sustained that responsiveness even at high/demanding workloads while their 'better' systems coughed and sputtered all over themselves.

For your new 320GB XT, if my guess is correct you should have about 65GB of writable 'overlapping' platters (or 28% of each platter) at the outside (fastest) edge; so that means you can make up to a 130 GB partition for Windows and it will stay on the fastest third of the HD. With the rest, make a data partition and move your user folders into it like I explain in the post I linked to before.

Note:
Don't move your Download folder or else you will see noticable delays as IE first downloads to the Temp folder and then moves the files over to the Download folder which (if moved) would be on the other partition. When a 'move' is on the same partition, just the directory entries are updated (very, very fast), when the 'move' is to a different partition, the file has to physically be moved to the other partition and with large files - this could take minutes.

For an even faster 'snappier' O/S, make the C: drive as small as you can (depending on how many programs/utilities you need/install) while leaving at least ~20GB free space (or more, for future installs). For a normal install of Win7x64 with 4GB RAM, including default hibernation and pagefiles - and a full Office install - a C: drive capacity of about 40 to 60 GB is just about optimum (with the user 'data' folders in another partition) for almost everyone.

Somewhere between using 10 - 20 % of the drives capacity for the C: partition is where I begin to see diminishing returns.

Generally though, as long as the C: drive is anything less than ~25% or less of the drives total capacity (and the capacity is at least 40GB as mentioned above, with sufficient free space allowed for) at that point the performance of the system is optimized.

To 'finish' the optimization, make sure you use a capable defragger (I highly recommend PerfectDisk Professional v11) once a month or so - right after Microsoft Update Tuesdays followed by a couple of reboots and a ccleaner run too.

See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...c-x-defraggler-perfectdisk10.html#post5609787


Hope this helped!

 

Excellent information!

As a regular guy, i mean, for us it's load up a certain set of apps, load up our Virtual Machines (use use macbook pro's) and then get to work. I figure the NAND will control most of that so it shouldn't be noticeable.

 

It's worth noting that IE9 doesn't do this (it just downloads directly where you told it to), so this information will soon become irrelevent.

 

Ah finally. I just don't understand why they designed it that way in IE.

 

Thanks for that, but I think it still works that way on my installs? (Need to check).

IE9 BETA v9.0.7930.16406, btw.

Is there an updated beta I should try?

 

I don't remember if that functionality has been included in any Beta versions or not, but it's definately slated for inclusion in the finished version.

(I don't have a link to hand I'm afraid...)

 

Change your IE temp folder location in Tools/Internet Options/Browsing History/Settings.

This has been around since I can remember. And as far as I can tell when I change my download location, it saves directly to the download location I specified unless I click "open" then it stores it in the temp folder.

 

I just ordered one of these for my g72

 

are they gonna come out with a newer model soon?

 

I asked Seagate, they didn't answer.

 

Amazon is having a sale - 500GB Momentus XT plus a free CMS Data Transfer Kit for $99. Seems like a good deal right?

And although I've read many excellent reviews for this HDD, have any of you seen the complaints on the Seagate forum? I was just about to purchase it, but now I'm not so sure.

If you have problems with Momentus XT, please come... - Seagate Community Forums

 

The complaints are mainly Macbook users and Lenovo users. Other than that the drive doesn't have many problems.

So the data tranfser kit is free.... Nice deal in that case!

 

Alright sounds good - thank you.

This is still considered the best notebook hard drive currently, right? Well besides SSDs

 

By far....

 

+1

I'm expecting so, the pricing has been really aggressive lately considering what seems like excellent sales for a new drive.

Also asked WD if they'd be releasing something similar, no response.

 

It's been pretty popular. I'd love to see a 640GB version or an 8GB cache version.

 

Just curious. With another Seagate drive I ordered, they also had a version if, costing just slightly more, with a G at the end of the model number, which meant it had some kind of shock protection.

I do not know how much protection that really gives, but that other time, just in case it helped, for only a few bucks more, I bought the G model.

Is there also a G model of this drive? If not, anyone know if one will be coming out soon?

 

Not at this time.

 

Do people think that G-Shock thing really makes a difference? If an option on their other notebook drives, I wonder why not with this one?

Also, any Black Friday specials on it? The lowest price I found on it today through Google Shopping, is I think $110 at Tiger Direct. (Not sure if there is a shipping charge there though. If they add an inflated "shipping" charge to it, may not be such a good deal any more. (I don't know if that price has anything to do with "Black Friday" or not.)

 

A page before your post.

Newegg also has it for $99.99 right now.

 

not really. it only has benefits when you move around with the laptop turned on. when it's off, it's already protected.

 

Id like to see some sort of speed test that takes into account whatever the hybrid part is doing.

HDTUNE says this is a regular mechanical hard drive although access time is super fast. loads and writing are not improved.

multiple tests nothing getting better.

 

Can I ask, let's say windows gets installed on the SSD...takes up the 3.7GB~ at least, then the rest on the 500GB area. But since Windows overloads itself with temporary files and extra things, what happens if the SSD drive gets full?

 

the ssd doesnt store anything its used as a giant cache

i have not personally noticed faster boot times over the 54k 500gb seagate i had. In fact its slower

but im still tuning it and figuring it out.

 

If the drive worked like what you are describing i think it would be way better than it is.

If it were two seperate devices of 4 gb and 500 gb. some sort of user controlled software to decide what to store on the nand.

I am curious if there is any utility to view what is stored on the nand?

I would be very interested to find out the entire thing is bogus lol. This is because whatever its doing there is no record of that I can tell.

And no I dont feel any speed differences yet. Im actually rebooting and watching the seconds now to see if its even getting better....

 

That's why I was asking if they are coming out with a newer model. I've been price watching and Newegg had it for about 110-120 before BF and then they had it at 99 yesterday. Then, Amazon followed few hours later with 99 and then sweetened the deal with the free CMS Data Transfer Kit. I don't know I'm new to this, but I know this is first generation.

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/not...rpm-2-5-sata-3-0gb-s-89-99-free-shipping.html

I'm pretty sure it still works, if not tell me =P
This makes it 89.99$

 

Do they usually reply?

 

Seagate, or for that matter most other manufacturers, will not comment other than any official roadmap. This is really nothing new. Sometimes there are leaks but this is rare and usually will not come from a generic source.

We can speculate all we want about XT derivatives but we all knew this was a new market for hybrid drives and time will tell if that market will take off or fall the wayside of ever lowering SSD prices.

 

id say however that if the price reductions continue through the rest of 2010, it could bode well. it may be that seagate is moving inventory to make room for newer hybrid drive models.

 

Isn't there new type of formating coming out after the 1st (advance format) not sure what others are calling it.

 

The XT is not format limited in its ability to cache data. The data is cached at low level to the NAND so anything that can use the HDD hardware can theoretically bennefit from it................

 

They answered my other questions yes.

 

Any known problems with the Compal JHL90 of Sager NP2096 (are essential the same) with this drive? I searched through the thread on the Seagate forum and found one person reporting an issue with this combination. Though it could just be that his drive was faulty .

 

After I installed my new XT, I thought the increased speed was either a placebo or just not much faster than my old drive. One day I had to install my old HDD back in to do some things and then it hit me. The boot times were so much slower, general file access was slower and I noticed how much slower the overall system felt and I couldn't wait to put my XT drive back.

When I contacted Seagate XT support, they suggested that the capacity of the hybrid drive would increase in the future. They could have said absolutely nothing.

 

What defrag program are you guys using with the Momentus XT? I read that you shouldn't defrag too often because it'll reset the learned portion of the SSD part, but it relearns it pretty quick so it's not such a big deal. But I currently use Iobit Smart Defrag which goes beyond just defragging and also organizes data that is used most often to the outer portion of the disk in order to read it faster. It seems to work good on my current HDD, but I'm wondering if I should just stick with Windows defrag once I install the Momentus XT.

Any thoughts?

Thanks

 

jpzsports,

I just took a look at Iobit SD and admit it looks pretty decent - especially considering it is free.

However, I don't think it supports defragging files offline like PerfectDisk does (which not only fully defrags normally unmoveable files - it also places them optimally on the drive too for peak performance).

With my XT I will defrag whenever the heads become too 'audible' under normal (ie 'light') use. Usually though, I'll only defrag after every Microsoft Update day (second Tuesday of each month). This is with the XT or without the XT in my various systems.

I suggest you download PerfectDisk 11 Professional and compare how your drive works with PD instead of ISD (make sure you disable the ISD 'auto' defrag options to make the test fair).

Then, when you do get/install the XT - you'll know which defragger will be the best for your use.

Remember though: whichever one you do decide to continue using - make sure that the 'auto defrag' is permanently disabled (its called 'stealth mode' in PD).

Good luck.

 

Well after December when SSD's drop in price it should effect this... right? And they could update to G3 SSD's.

I'm not upgrading until like Jan. or Feb. so hopefully there'll be new stuff out.

 

ok I'm gonna pull the trigger and buy this tomorrow on amazon. My Staples gift card won't get used because they don't have this or SSDs. I guess not mainstream quite yet.

 

Seems to be a good drive. I can't really can't say its any faster than any other 7200rpm but it works..for me anyway.

 

this device would be perfect if

the ssd was just a specific partition. And it was 16gb large.

Then, install windows 7


this smart cache doesnt make enough sense to me.

So anyhow, as soon as the nand gets big enough for all of windows, and then throw on a 750 or 1 tb windsor drive. Itll be perfect then, way cooler than a regular ssd.

 

I partly agree. I'd like a larger NAND and 16 GB would probably be perfect but if you want a separate partition why not just buy a 16GB SSD and a 750GB HDD?

I personally would just really like 750GB version of what they have now... and I don't feel comfortable buying a first generation product lol I've seen a lot of complains on newegg.

 

The idea here is while the instal may be 11GB or so thw system does not use all those files etc. In reality it accessses way less to run the OS. Now maybe 4GB when you use multipled programs starts to kick out some of the OS files. Under this circunstance you see deminished returns with the XT as is. This is why mosty want more cache.

16GB would cache most all of the OS and programs unless you really access alot of programs. This of course with SLC instead of MLC would have put he price at hte intro with main stream SSD's and have hampered it for a few reasons.

1.) In all dual bay systems a primary SSD would be fast if not faster.
2.) Even in a single bay system for the price true SSDs would be direct competition.
3.) Why drop that kind of money on unproven tech?
4.) high price equates to limited market segment

And the list goes on. Does this mean we've seen the end of hybrids, for one I hope not.................

 

Very tempted to replace my 320 GB 7200 RPM Hitachi with an XT, but only the fact that it's Seagate is stopping me. I've had 3 Seagate drives and 2 of them failed. I wish there was Hitachi, WD or other reliable brand that would make hybrid HDDs.

 

because that fills two hd slots instead of just one obviously.

 

Only if you have two slots in your laptop. Granted with users needing an optical drive less and less it makes sense to replace that with another HDD or SSD.

There may be some complaints, but overall, I think the concensus here at NBR is pretty positive. I'm one with a positive experience so far too.

I don't think more NAND storage would hurt, but personally, if they do add more I'd rather the end user be able to have some control over what its used for. Because I really don't care if my system boots super fast, but if I use a couple apps and/or games on a regular basis I may prefer those to boot up faster instead. Even if configurability was limited to "prioritize OS" or "prioritize apps" I would be fine with that.

 

Anyone know why anywhere I go to find the cheapest Momentus XT is the 500 GB at around 99 bucks but the 250 and 320 GB are more expensive...?

 

Holliday sales................

in answer to others in former posts , the other reason not too place a 16GB SSD and then a HDD as two seperate devices is the SATA II interface. A high end SSD can now push the limits of the bus as just the one device, putting the additional strain of a 7200 RPM drive capable of another 115 MBs with just one drive connection would not be the best idea............