WD: 2Tb Green power drives with 500Gb per platter. When are the 1.5&1Tb models due?

Stonedofmoo · 22 Jan 2009 at 19:41

Well the 2Tb drives are here, thats 4* 500Gb platters. So the current 1Tb 32mb cache model has 3* 333Mb platters and I'm wondering when that will be replaced with a 2* 500Gb model. It's logical they would as it would have even lower power consumption on a already economical drive.

The Samsung EcoGreen F2 drives will be packing 500Gb platters but they don't even come close to WD Green power drives for low energy consumption so I don't mind holding out a little longer for a new storage drive

miniyazz · 22 Jan 2009 at 22:31

Dunno about 2tb drives being here - on preorder only. Any word from OcUK about availability?

PistolPete · 23 Jan 2009 at 13:08

I think he was speaking figuratively when he said that the drive are here.
However, at the expected prices it's a hefty premium to pay - 2.5+ time the cost for 2x the storage?

Greenlizard0 · 23 Jan 2009 at 15:20

Are any other companies planning on larger drives? I don't see the point in getting a 1.5tb drive. I'm filling up my 1tb drive fast.

CaseyChaos · 23 Jan 2009 at 16:02

Yeah I was looking at getting a 1TB drive although would be better to get 2TB and sell my external 1TB. Also should the prices of 1TB drive come down once the 2TBs are released?

Stonedofmoo · 23 Jan 2009 at 19:00

To be honest with the market I'd just get one while you can. All PC component prices are likely to rise rather than fall with the low £ value.

So far only WD have announced a 2Tb drive, but Samsung are launching their 1.5Tb drives.

CaseyChaos · 24 Jan 2009 at 00:24

Stonedofmoo said:
To be honest with the market I'd just get one while you can. All PC component prices are likely to rise rather than fall with the low £ value.

yeah I noticed that, bought my shuttle q6600 and everything 3-4months ago, costs 20% more now. Still not sure whether to wait and buy a new WD 2TB or just buy a 1TB and keep the external 1TB

tutu · 24 Jan 2009 at 12:01

I'll take 2

On for my Sky HD box and another for my PC.. not sure if 5400 RPM is fast enought for the first tho.

Stonedofmoo · 24 Jan 2009 at 12:41

The rpm isn't the only factor in transfer rates so I can guarantee the 2Tb drive will be fast enough in a Sky box

james.miller · 24 Jan 2009 at 12:50

PistolPete said:
I think he was speaking figuratively when he said that the drive are here.
However, at the expected prices it's a hefty premium to pay - 2.5+ time the cost for 2x the storage?

always the way for top end gear. the 1tb drives were no different on release in fact, the 1tb hitachi was £199.74 on pre-order from ocuk

HighlandeR · 24 Jan 2009 at 12:54

Yeah the 2TBs tad pricey they look like they need too fall down to £150-160 price tags, maybe in a few months time.

Seagate launching 1.5TB almost feels pointless lol they should just do it quietly since they should be doing 2TBs tbh.

I think at 2TB thats gonna be max for a good long time.... Hmm could rename it HDMovies drive

james.miller · 24 Jan 2009 at 13:09

HighlandeR said:
Yeah the 2TBs tad pricey they look like they need too fall down to £150-160 price tags, maybe in a few months time.

Seagate launching 1.5TB almost feels pointless lol they should just do it quietly since they should be doing 2TBs tbh.

I think at 2TB thats gonna be max for a good long time.... Hmm could rename it HDMovies drive

hmmm dont know, there have been 5 platter drives in the past. if i were them id concerntrait more on moving to 667gb platters probably

Stonedofmoo · 24 Jan 2009 at 13:14

lol yeah but isn't there a limitation in current windows that stop it from being able to work with partitions over 2Tb?

So with that being the case theres no rush. I'm quite happy with another 1Tb green drive, I just don't want the last generation of technoligy with 333Mb platters when a 500Mb platter drive is on the cards.

londonbairn · 24 Jan 2009 at 19:04

I think Vista can handle over 2TB but XP can't

tutu · 24 Jan 2009 at 19:13

Is anyone from OcUK able to comment on when it will be available?

photoshop · 24 Jan 2009 at 19:29

rafster said:
I think Vista can handle over 2TB but XP can't

XP cant take 2TB drives??

DigitalReaper · 24 Jan 2009 at 20:04

Sounds plausible, 2^32 blocks @ 512 bytes/block = 2TB.

Happy · 24 Jan 2009 at 20:23

photoshop said:
XP cant take 2TB drives??

Yeah it doesn't have the special Files System that Vista offers, can't remember what it's called though.

sb_ · 25 Jan 2009 at 00:02

Happy said:
Yeah it doesn't have the special Files System that Vista offers, can't remember what it's called though.

Are you talking about FAT32 vs NTFS

Phemo · 25 Jan 2009 at 00:11

Happy said:
Yeah it doesn't have the special Files System that Vista offers, can't remember what it's called though.

Well, Vista uses NTFS just like XP does. Vista's NTFS supports a few minor features that XP's doesn't, such as symbolic links and on-the-fly partition resizing, but nothing relating to the maximum partition size.

XP should be absolutely fine with 2TB drives. NTFS supports a 16TB (it might even be 16EB - I forget now) maximum single partition, as far as I'm aware. In theory there's no reason why XP can't support that but seemingly an artificial limit is put in place - possibly something like XP's limit for 32GB FAT32 partitions when in fact FAT32 supports 2TB partitions also.

Edit: No it seems to be a restriction of MBR. If you use GPT it can support larger, but XP 32-bit can't use GPT.