A simple 500GB/1TB HDD recommendation + question.

Anesthetize

Anesthetize

Anesthetize

Associate
Joined
14 Apr 2011
Posts
179
So the question first, when gaming, do hard drives typically make a lot of noise? or is it only during the loading sections? (in-game would be a pain, during loading wouldn't be a problem).

Assuming HDDs are loud only when loading, any should be fine. So, I'm looking for a cheap 500GB or 1TB HDD. I honestly don't need 1TB as I've never filled the 200GB I have on my old pre-built PC, but price-wise, the 1TBs were only about £10 more than the 500GB, so it would seem silly not to go 1TB, unless someone knows of some insanely cheap 500GB HDDs.

I was looking at the Samsung Spinpoint, but noticed a similar Western Digital and Seagate HDD similarly priced with just as much praise. So with that in mind, is there any peticular one that's worth going for?

As always, thanks for any help! :D

EDIT: Bare in mind I'm not looking into SSDs yet, incase anyone felt inclined to mention them ;)
 
Last edited:
I think you'll find that everyone has their personal preferences.

I own 8 of these and they're fast for a mechanical HDD and I can hardly hear them above the fans in my case:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-082-SA&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1279

When I'm gaming I can't hear any noise from my PC over the sound of the game.

If you can hear your HDD while playing Crysis 2 there's something seriously wrong with the drive!

I'm sure other people would say the same about the other makes and equally you'll hear tales of woe about the various different makes.

With 1TB drives from £44-£49 at OcUK this 500GB drive may be worth a look, if you don't need the space, as it's only £30 this week:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-364-WD
 
Surveyor is right. It's like asking a group of car people what their favourite engine is. Everyone is going to give a different answer, and have different reasons.

However. You wont go far wrong with the Samsung F3 pointed out for you. I've had a few and they're excellent. The WD blue is also a great drive, only used the laptop version however, and it was great also.
 
Stoner81 said:
Do you want the drive to be your system drive (aka C:\) if so then I would suggest getting a drive with 64MB cache such as this;

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-342-WD&groupid=1657&catid=1660&subcat=1664

I have one of these as my system drive after having a drive with only 16MB cache (might have been 32MB) and the difference is huge!

Stoner81.
Click to expand...

Doubtful that the amount of cache made a huge difference.

More likely you moved from a drive with low density platters to one with high density platters.
 
^^ Meaning what exactly? If you are doubting what I have said then quite frankly you are wrong as I have seen it with my own eyes right in front of me, the speed difference is there.

Stoner81.
 
Stoner81 said:
^^ Meaning what exactly? If you are doubting what I have said then quite frankly you are wrong as I have seen it with my own eyes right in front of me, the speed difference is there.

Stoner81.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying you didn't see a difference.

I'm saying it wasn't cache size which caused the improvement it was increased platter density. This has a far greater effect on performance.
 
I don't understand what you mean by "increased platter density" I'm afraid, sorry about the previous post I didn't mean to be defensive or anything like that. The drive I had was a 500GB one so there is not much difference in terms of size if that is what you mean?

Stoner81.
 
Stoner81 said:
I don't understand what you mean by "increased platter density" I'm afraid, sorry about the previous post I didn't mean to be defensive or anything like that. The drive I had was a 500GB one so there is not much difference in terms of size if that is what you mean?

Stoner81.
Click to expand...

No problem.

All 3.5" HDD's are made up from a number (1-4) of magnetic platters.

The Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB has 2x320GB platters.

Older 500GB drives might have 3x167GB platters.

The data is packed almost twice as densely on the platters of the WD Caviar Black than it is on the old 500GB drive.

The data can be read much more quickly off the higher density platters as the data is packed more tightly together and more can be read on every spin of the disk.

Theoretically the drive with 320GB platters is almost twice as fast as the one with 167GB platters.
 
You're welcome.

According to this database:

http://rml527.blogspot.com/2010/10/hdd-platter-database-western-digital-35.html

the WD Caviar Black 640GB actually uses 500GB platters. The highest density 320GB on each platter is used with the rest disabled.

The WD Caviar Blue 500GB uses a single 500GB platter so it will be pretty fast but a little slower than the Black as it uses the the whole platter including the lowest density part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom