New internal hard drive needed....advice please...

StevieP · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:12

I am in need of a larger internal hard drive (ideally 2TB) mainly for storage and games etc but I'm not sure whice is the best to go for!

At the moment I have an old'ish 500GB Seagate drive (7200RPM) as my primary C drive running windows 7 and another 320GB drive that I use for storage (not sure of the make or speed tho! - is there any way to find out??)

My question is, will I see a noticable speed decrease if I go for one of the 5400RPM or 5900RPM 2TB drives that can be had for around £55 compared to my existing Seagate one??

My other option is to stick with my Seagate drive for my OS and use a 2TB drive for storage and Steam etc.

I've recently upgraded to a new MSI mobo that supports SATA 6GB - will this benefit me at all since I'm not going for an SSD just yet??

So many options....... :confused:

kmufc77 · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:23

Sata 6GB for HDDs is a gimmick ignore it, there is hardly any speed difference.

The only benefit for Sata 6GB is for SSDs

As for decent 2TB HDDs there are currently many avaliable

I personally swear by Western Digital they are super quiet/reliable and have a excellent RMA service.

The Samsung F4 drives are probably the fastest 5400-5900 RPMS drives available.

Those are the two drives that i would consider above all other 2TB drives.

Also modern day 5400 RPM drives are faster than what they used to be.

Thats my opinion,others may disagree

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-327-WD&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1955

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-097-SA&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1955

Philtor · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:31

kmufc77 said:
I personally swear by Western Digital they are super quiet/reliable and have a excellent RMA service.

As above I also swear by WD Drives

StevieP · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:31

Thanks for the quick reply!!

So ignoring the SATA 6GB bit, I'm assuming its not worth the extra £11 to go for the SATA 6GB Western Digital over the SATA II Western Digital as all the other specs appear to be identical??

Also, is there any noticable difference between the 32MB Cache and 64MB Cache models??

And lastly, how does this Seagate drive compare to the WD ones??

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-244-SE

(Only as it seems to be the cheapest but sometimes you get what you pay for!!)

*edit*

This one: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-327-WD doesnt actually state the speed!?!? Any ideas??

kmufc77 · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:38

StevieP said:
Thanks for the quick reply!!

So ignoring the SATA 6GB bit, I'm assuming its not worth the extra £11 to go for the SATA 6GB Western Digital over the SATA II Western Digital as all the other specs appear to be identical??

Also, is there any noticable difference between the 32MB Cache and 64MB Cache models??

And lastly, how does this Seagate drive compare to the WD ones??

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-244-SE

(Only as it seems to be the cheapest but sometimes you get what you pay for!!)

*edit*

This one: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-327-WD doesnt actually state the speed!?!? Any ideas??

No 6GB is no benefit for HDDs at all!.

I cant comment over the seagate as i dont use there drives,though its 5900RPM instead of 5400RPM which the WD uses.

64mb cache is a slight benefit over 32mb but nothing major.

All WD Caviar green drives are 5400RPM.

If you want a silent HDD that runs cool the WD green are the drives to get.

They are also supriseling quick

StevieP · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:44

kmufc77 said:
If you want a silent HDD that runs cools the WD green are the drives to get.

Looks like the way to go then!

So just to clarify, I'm assuming that until I get brave enough to stump up for an SSD, I'd be best retaining my current 7200RPM Seagate drive to run Windows 7 from and using the new drive as a replacement for my even older 320GB storage drive?

kmufc77 · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:48

StevieP said:
Looks like the way to go then!

So just to clarify, I'm assuming that until I get brave enough to stump up for an SSD, I'd be best retaining my current 7200RPM Seagate drive to run Windows 7 from and using the new drive as a replacement for my even older 320GB storage drive?

How old is the 7200rpm drive?

As if its very old your new WD 5400 RPM will be quicker no doubt.

These are excellent OS 7200 rpm drives: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-082-SA&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1279

Rick click on computer

Properties

Click on Device manager

The click on Disk Drives

It will say what drive you have post the name of it.

StevieP · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:56

In device manager I have 2 drives listed as follows:

- ST3320620AS ATA Device
- ST3500320AS ATA Device

Is this what you needed??

kmufc77 · 14 Jul 2011 at 17:59

http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2d1099f4fa74c010VgnVCM100000dd04090aRCRD ST3320620AS ATA Device

If this is your OS drive this is fine its a decent 7200rpm

Though this particular drive did have issues with its firmware resulting in the drives not being recognized in the bios resulting in systems not booting,though as you havent mentioned any problems i assume you have the correct updated firmware.

http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=c89ef141e7f43110VgnVCM100000f5ee0a0aRCRD ST3500320AS ATA Device

StevieP · 14 Jul 2011 at 18:07

kmufc77 said:
http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2d1099f4fa74c010VgnVCM100000dd04090aRCRD ST3320620AS ATA Device

If this is your OS drive this is fine its a decent 7200rpm

Though this particular drive did have issues with its firmware resulting in the drives not being recognized in the bios resulting in systems not booting,though as you havent mentioned any problems i assume you have the correct updated firmware.

http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=c89ef141e7f43110VgnVCM100000f5ee0a0aRCRD ST3500320AS ATA Device

Thanks for that!! (and no, never had any issues with booting or the drive not being recognised - although I dont think I've ever updated the firmware on ANY hard drive!)

I think I'll continue using the 500GB Seagate drive for my OS and get one of the WD drives for my storage drive to replace the other 320 Seagate one I have!

Thanks for all the help guys....

StevieP · 14 Jul 2011 at 19:42

Hmmm, now I'm having 2nd thoughts!

Given that my existing hard drives aren't quite as poor as I'd thought, now I'm thinking of splashing out on an SSD for my OS and leaving both my existing drives as storage!

So now the new question is, which SSD is the one to go for? I've read that the latest OCZ ones with the sandforce controllers are the best! Is this right?

I don't want to be spending too much and would want probably 120GB as I would imagine the OS would take up quite a bit??

Damn that upgrade itch!

kmufc77 · 14 Jul 2011 at 21:39

The New OCZ SSDs are having issues at present so i would avoid at the moment until a working firmware is available.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-009-CR&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1427

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-013-IN&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1427

(Intel are rated for being the most stable for SSDs)

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-048-OC&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1427

Take you pick really of the above,all the drives are decent without any problems as far as i know.

I have the Crucial M4 and i can highly recommend it

An average windows 7 OS install is around 20-30gb

StevieP · 14 Jul 2011 at 22:16

I'm liking the look of the M4 even though its a little more than I was looking to spend!!! (obviously going from a £50-odd spend for a 2TB storage drive!

)

One thing though, I know you say the OCZ drives are having issues - is that ALL OCZ drives or just some??

Also, how come the quoted write speed is so much lower on the M4 (175MB/sec compared to 500MB/sec on the OCZ!?!?!?)

kmufc77 · 14 Jul 2011 at 22:44

StevieP said:
I'm liking the look of the M4 even though its a little more than I was looking to spend!!! (obviously going from a £50-odd spend for a 2TB storage drive! )

One thing though, I know you say the OCZ drives are having issues - is that ALL OCZ drives or just some??

Also, how come the quoted write speed is so much lower on the M4 (175MB/sec compared to 500MB/sec on the OCZ!?!?!?)

The new OCZs are the fastest SSDs around which use the new Sandforce SF-2281 controller though lots of ppl worldwide are having serious issues at present.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-076-OC&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1427

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-071-OC&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1427

I believe the new Corsair drives also have problems as they use the same SF-2281 controller : http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-021-CS&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1427

The sandforce SF-2281 controller allows faster write speeds compared to the M4,though write speeds are only important when your installing things,so 90% of the time your only using read speeds.

The Vertez 2E OCZ drives are superb drives and dont have any issues as far as im aware. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-048-OC&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=1427

StevieP · 16 Jul 2011 at 17:55

Thanks for the info! I was going to ask about the Corsair drives as opposed to the Crucial M4 one but if its a controller issue rather than the drive itself it looks like the M4 will be the way to go!

Couple of further questions though...

1) Is there a huge advantage to be had going for SATA 6GB rather than the SATA II drives when talking about SSD's? (I'm thinking specifically of the OCZ Vertex drive you linked to over the M4 Corsair one!)

2) Does an SSD work like a regular hard drive when it comes to installing an OS? (eg. can you partition one like you can a mechanical drive?)

Thanks......

kmufc77 · 16 Jul 2011 at 21:40

StevieP said:
Thanks for the info! I was going to ask about the Corsair drives as opposed to the Crucial M4 one but if its a controller issue rather than the drive itself it looks like the M4 will be the way to go!

Couple of further questions though...

1) Is there a huge advantage to be had going for SATA 6GB rather than the SATA II drives when talking about SSD's? (I'm thinking specifically of the OCZ Vertex drive you linked to over the M4 Corsair one!)

2) Does an SSD work like a regular hard drive when it comes to installing an OS? (eg. can you partition one like you can a mechanical drive?)

Thanks......

Sata 6GB does benefit with SSDs unlike HDDs. i think with the M4 your likely to get around 150mbish more with the read which is a huge amount.

The Vertez 2E are slower than the M4 but have faster writes,the M4 is faster for read speeds which is important over the write speed.
Though the Vertez 2E is no slouch and is a superb SSD!

As far as im adware there is no disadvantage/advantage with a partition on a SSD,no different to an HDD

Philtor · 17 Jul 2011 at 03:02

kmufc77 said:
The Vertez 2E are slower than the M4

LOL !!! Your talking a load of **** there kmufc77.

kmufc77 · 17 Jul 2011 at 09:18

philtorrens said:
LOL !!! Your talking a load of **** there kmufc77.

Care to explain why?

The M4 has read speeds past 400,the 2E has read speeds of 285.,general windows performance will the around the same,but with faster read speeds the M4 will surely be faster loading etc.

Though as i have already stated the 2E has faster write speeds.

Also great contribution to the thread!,the OP will be so much more clearer now with your post,if my post is so full of ****,how about you help the OP with your SSD knowledge?.

Philtor · 18 Jul 2011 at 02:47

I was having a laugh kmufc77

You said yourself that the Vertex 2E has faster write speeds. Chill