Seagate or Western Digital?

Secret_Window · 12 Oct 2007 at 19:03

My maxtor SATAII 160gb is being generally gh3y atm, for space and for loading in games. It now even makes some weird noise that I have seen others report. I think it's on its way out so I want to get a bigger, quicker and more robust hdd.

I'm down to two choices, either seagate or western digital. I know both makes are brilliant, but are there any differences that should be make me choose one over the other?

cheers

Will_3rd · 12 Oct 2007 at 19:07

I think the AAKS series from WD takes it at the moment, think there are some better drives on the horizon though not so clued up on them however.

Secret_Window · 12 Oct 2007 at 19:19

Another question, approximately how much actual space do you get on both 250gb and 320gb?

Mongy2130 · 12 Oct 2007 at 19:26

I get 232gb formatted on a 250gb wd AAKS

Secret_Window · 12 Oct 2007 at 19:29

Not bad, I'm undecided about the space. I tend to download a lot more now, but I still do a sort out every now and then.

Price wise, is the extra £££ worth it for 320gb or perhaps even 400-500gb?

Will_3rd · 12 Oct 2007 at 19:37

Get what you can afford, from personal experience I would get a 500GB which would last you a good long while.

MumboJumbo · 12 Oct 2007 at 20:58

My maxtor drive is clicking and buzzing too now. Is going to die soon.

I think both seagate and western digital are equally good. Loads of people say western digital. But what is the difference for the price difference?

bringans · 12 Oct 2007 at 21:02

Dont forget the Samsungs, very good imho. if I have a choice, Samsung and WD = first, then SG.

The thing I *** about WD is the RMA policy. I will pay a little more sometimes for that alone.

thefishdude · 12 Oct 2007 at 21:15

alos the 500gb aaks is on special this week

£64.61 including vat
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-120-WD&groupid=701&catid=14&subcat=940

Will_3rd · 12 Oct 2007 at 22:16

8igdave said:
I think both seagate and western digital are equally good. Loads of people say western digital. But what is the difference for the price difference?

The AAKS series has slightly better performance then the 7200.10, although the Seagate drive has a 5 year warranty compared to 3 on the WD.

MumboJumbo · 13 Oct 2007 at 10:37

Will_3rd said:
The AAKS series has slightly better performance then the 7200.10, although the Seagate drive has a 5 year warranty compared to 3 on the WD.

But are you going to notice that extra speed in real time?

Will_3rd · 13 Oct 2007 at 11:11

8igdave said:
But are you going to notice that extra speed in real time?

Not sure, think you can only see the difference using synthetic benchmarks such as HDTach etc

frustin · 13 Oct 2007 at 15:52

i'm thinking i might go for a couple of 500Gig 7200.11's. i read the review on storagereview.com but i also read that they did the test on the multi-user version and not the 7200.11 (which is for home users or something).

Tomsk · 13 Oct 2007 at 16:00

Secret_Window said:
Another question, approximately how much actual space do you get on both 250gb and 320gb?

232GB on a 250GB
298GB on a 320GB
465GB on a 500GB
+/- 1GB depending on drive manufacturer

Piston_Broke · 15 Oct 2007 at 11:18

********Thread Hijack

***********

would realy appreciate some advise we are going to buy a 500Gb Drive in the next few days and would like to know what you think WD AAKS or Seagate 7200.11 Series is the Seagate really worth the extra £25 ?

frustin · 15 Oct 2007 at 15:29

no one knows. there hasnt been a good enough review on the 7200.11 yet. people will undoubtably say no it isn't.

humax · 16 Oct 2007 at 01:14

cant go wrong with a WD AAKS. only £63 cant be bad