d6bmg Posted April 11, 2013 Posted April 11, 2013 (edited) triple post? what's happening? Edited April 11, 2013 by d6bmg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroFight Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Here's the HD Tune results for the 7200.14 drive, still awaiting parts for the 7200.8 build... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 The sequentials are awesome but the access time is just average. Thought maybe we'd have 12ms these days with a modern 7200rpm, but I guess mechanical can only go so fast. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroFight Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 The sequentials are awesome but the access time is just average. Thought maybe we'd have 12ms these days with a modern 7200rpm, but I guess mechanical can only go so fast. I think the earlier version of the drive has 3 platters instead of 2, and that had about 12ms response time. I just have the later version that's quieter and apparently more reliable. I would assume you could get less than that on 10k rpm drives though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
My_Inner_Fred Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Wow the side to side comparison of the results were quite unexpected for me... quite impressed with the results of the newer drive. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d6bmg Posted April 13, 2013 Posted April 13, 2013 Here's the HD Tune results for the 7200.14 drive, still awaiting parts for the 7200.8 build... 2TB Drive HDTune.png THat's good enough for a mechanical drive. You can't expect much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroFight Posted April 13, 2013 Posted April 13, 2013 Here's the benchmark for the old 7200.8 drive. Strange the transfer speed drops so drastically as (I assume) the head gets to the edge of the disk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d6bmg Posted April 13, 2013 Posted April 13, 2013 ^ The problem with older technology: they are not consistent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeSoprano Posted April 13, 2013 Posted April 13, 2013 Great speed from the new drive, but I'd say the it being sata3 compared to sata2 on the older drive is what is making the drive so much faster. Looking at the results from hd tune I don't think the older drive is going to be running much longer. I wouldn't trust it with any important data. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroFight Posted April 13, 2013 Posted April 13, 2013 Great speed from the new drive, but I'd say the it being sata3 compared to sata2 on the older drive is what is making the drive so much faster. Looking at the results from hd tune I don't think the older drive is going to be running much longer. I wouldn't trust it with any important data. I'll bear that in mind, I'll keep the data backed up. Cheers for the heads up Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted April 14, 2013 Posted April 14, 2013 Here's the benchmark for the old 7200.8 drive. Strange the transfer speed drops so drastically as (I assume) the head gets to the edge of the disk. [img=http://forums.overclockersclub.com/public/style_images/master/attachicon.gif] 250GB 7200.8 HDTune.png Dat access time :yuck: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now