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.
← Previous page

    320GB@5400 or 200GB@7200

    Discussion in 'Sager and Clevo' started by Zelig96, May 26, 2008.

  1. kaltmond

    kaltmond Clepple

    Reputations:
    699
    Messages:
    1,454
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    ya..see my earlier post, ~70MB transfer....really good....
     
  2. pukemon

    pukemon are you unplugged?

    Reputations:
    461
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    81
    do the sata 300's and/or 16 MB cache harddrives use more power? i thought i remember reading that one of these newer generation features use more juice. i don't remember.
     
  3. eleron911

    eleron911 HighSpeedFreak

    Reputations:
    3,886
    Messages:
    11,104
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    456
    1.8W as far as I`ve read for reading and 2.2W for writing.
    As oposed to 1.8 writing on the 5400/320 GB.
     
  4. pukemon

    pukemon are you unplugged?

    Reputations:
    461
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    81
    were you answering my question eleron? i think that was what i read.
     
  5. eleron911

    eleron911 HighSpeedFreak

    Reputations:
    3,886
    Messages:
    11,104
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    456
  6. pukemon

    pukemon are you unplugged?

    Reputations:
    461
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    81
    you don't have to. i am not 100 percent sure about your numbers either, but i remember some variance similar to that. reading this thread is making me question what i want to buy a little harder. my 5400 usually tops out @ 37*c under load, so i still have plenty of temp. headroom to get a 7200 rpm drive, though i don't really need the performance.
     
  7. kaltmond

    kaltmond Clepple

    Reputations:
    699
    Messages:
    1,454
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    37°C is really cool ....my poor HDD reaches 63°C....
     
  8. pukemon

    pukemon are you unplugged?

    Reputations:
    461
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    81
    but i bet your gpu does a lot better than my ~74* idle with no external cooling. :p
     
  9. kaltmond

    kaltmond Clepple

    Reputations:
    699
    Messages:
    1,454
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    ehr....ya.....~74°C idle is a bit......mine is ~36°C
     
  10. pukemon

    pukemon are you unplugged?

    Reputations:
    461
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    81
    i can't get any straight answers on getting to the gpu and what's there. i have the disassembly guide but i don't want to take it apart and there be a thermal pad waiting for me. i want to put as5 on it and see what happens. but in the meantime my trusty 4" electric fan keeps it cool @ 55* and <.
     
  11. Audigy

    Audigy Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    734
    Messages:
    650
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Yap they will use more juice :D

    Here we can see that my Hitachi 200GB 7k(wich is SATA 150) drive needs less power(1W less on load :eek: ) than one WD 320GB 5k drive(SATA 300):
    [​IMG]

    The cache here doesn´t interfere much. The WD 320GB drive have only 8MB and the Hitachi 200GB have 16MB, and still consumes less 1W on load.

    ;)
     
  12. pukemon

    pukemon are you unplugged?

    Reputations:
    461
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    81
    ^^^^ why'd u do that to me. i've been considering the wd 320 5400 but it consumes more power than competition. grrrr. i like wd because they're quiet and usually more conservative on power. so who has quietest and least juice sucking 320 gig 5400 and/or 7200 rpm hdd?
     
← Previous page