SPCR

Posted: **Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:55 am**

According to wikipedia on MBR,

"Both the partition length and partition start address are stored as 32-bit quantities. Because the sector size is 2^9 (= 512) bytes, this implies that neither the maximum size of a partition nor the maximum start address (both in bytes) can exceed 2^32 × 2^9 = 2^41 bytes, or 2 × 2^40 = 2 TiB."

It sounds like you can use MBR on a 3TB drive, partition it into two 1.5TB partitions and see all the space in Windows XP. Does anyone know if this is possible? Thanks.

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2010 2:04 pm**

Bought two of these WD20EARS 2TB drives. Love 'em, they seem fairly quick as well, faster than a 500GB 7200RPM drive I had. A couple things I had to do to make my system stable and a few extra things I did, however.

* Update Asus P5K-E bios to version 1305
* Insert 2GB of ram or less to be able run the WD widdle utility (version 1.05) so I could disable head parking.
* Install Intel IAStor driver 9.6.0.1014 and then disable the IAStorDataMgrSvc service to prevent event log errors of "device, \Device\Ide\iaStor0, did not respond with ..."
* Edit the registry setting LPMDSTATE to be zero at:
"HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\iaStor\Parameters\Port0".

Everything works great now! Fast, lots of storage... take care.

Posted: **Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:01 pm**

Any word on 2 platter 1.5TB WD Greens showing up in the channel yet?

Posted: **Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:27 pm**

too bad WD still uses that deceptive marketing/advertising regarding the rotational speeds

Posted: **Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:15 pm**

Dear Mike and Co,

Would you consider expanding your comparison chart to include laptop hard drives? I'm actually considering that maybe getting a laptop drive would be a good idea for my desktop. Laptop drives can be up to the 2.5" size standard which SSDs typically are, correct? My case actually has SSD cages, so I'm thinking I could pop in a large laptop drive in there if I wanted, without even having to do any modding...

The point is, I want to minimize my system's power draw in every aspect, and I believe I really have no use for 2TB. Right now I'm going on a 1TB Samsung F3 spinpoint for my OS, games, and data, and I'm nowhere near close to filling it up. I would love a version of this new EARS drive but something like 500 or 750GB. How about a single-platter HDD?? But seeing as how that's unlikely to be released, I'm thinking going for a laptop HDD is my answer. Laptop HDDs are still substantially smaller capacity and have the same focus of power efficiency and silence that I want.

But there aren't that many reviews of laptop HDDs, although I'm checking out this one now...

SPCR, what do you guys think about my idea?

Thanks!

Posted: **Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:29 pm**

Well, actually, I guess this chart has most of what I'm looking for... one quibble is that I have to flip between that one and the newer one. But it works.

Are there any reviews of newer laptop drives in the works?

Thanks

Posted: **Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:43 pm**

DaRuSsIaMaN --

This review is about a 3TB drive and that table compares only high capacity drives. Look elsewhere for 2.5" drive info -- like the other review you linked or the Recommended HDDs -- which admittedly has not been updated in a while...

Bottom line is:

1) 2.5" drives may have lower vibration, but at this point, not lower noise. The latest WD Greens are amazing in both aspects.
2) 2.5" drives are not as durable as 3.5" ones in 24/7 operation, as they are designed for use in laptops where start/stop is much more common.
3) higher density in the 3.5" drives leads to typically higher performance overall. They tend to have higher random access time as well.
4) power efficiency in 2.5" drives (1~2.5W) is the only clearly better spec -- the lowest power 3.5" drives are something like 3.5W~6W.

You could try a 2-platter WD Green 1.5 TB -- and if you don't need the capacity, short stroke it to maybe 500gb for even better performance.

Posted: **Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:46 pm**

DaRuSsIaMaN wrote:Are there any reviews of newer laptop drives in the works?

Yes. The latest gen 2.5" drives are 750gb. Coming.

Tip: they are not significantly quieter.

Posted: **Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:41 pm**

MikeC wrote: 1) 2.5" drives may have lower vibration, but at this point, not lower noise. The latest WD Greens are amazing in both aspects.
2) 2.5" drives are not as durable as 3.5" ones in 24/7 operation, as they are designed for use in laptops where start/stop is much more common.
3) higher density in the 3.5" drives leads to typically higher performance overall. They tend to have higher random access time as well.
4) power efficiency in 2.5" drives (1~2.5W) is the only clearly better spec -- the lowest power 3.5" drives are something like 3.5W~6W.

You could try a 2-platter WD Green 1.5 TB -- and if you don't need the capacity, short stroke it to maybe 500gb for even better performance.

Thank you for that succinct overview.

Ok, so how about those 1.5 TB and 1 TB "EARS" variations? In addition to the 1.5 TB 2-platter version that you mentioned, there's also a 1 TB one:
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Intellipower-Desktop-WD10EARS/dp/B002U1N95K/ref=pd_cp_e_2
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Intellipower-Desktop-WD15EARS/dp/B002ZCXJZE/ref=dp_return_2?ie=UTF8&n=172282&s=electronics

Any plans to review those two as well?

EDIT: or is it safe to assume that these variants will have exactly the same characteristics, except capacity? But 1 less platter should make at least a little difference, right... ?

Posted: **Sun Feb 20, 2011 12:51 pm**

Hi Mike,
Would you consider doing a review on the Hitachi 5k3000 series? Apparently, they have 600GB platters and come in 3TB, 2TB, 1.5TB models. Given how well the hitachi notebook drive performs, I'd be interested to see how these fare compared to the WD Greens that you reviewed here.

If I make a donation for it, would you contact Hitachi yourself to try to get samples? Or should I try to contact them as suggested here?

Posted: **Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:09 pm**

DaRuSsIaMaN wrote:Hi Mike,
Would you consider doing a review on the Hitachi 5k3000 series? Apparently, they have 600GB platters and come in 3TB, 2TB, 1.5TB models. Given how well the hitachi notebook drive performs, I'd be interested to see how these fare compared to the WD Greens that you reviewed here.

If I make a donation for it, would you contact Hitachi yourself to try to get samples? Or should I try to contact them as suggested here?

DaRuSsIaMaN wrote:
MikeC wrote: 1) 2.5" drives may have lower vibration, but at this point, not lower noise. The latest WD Greens are amazing in both aspects.
2) 2.5" drives are not as durable as 3.5" ones in 24/7 operation, as they are designed for use in laptops where start/stop is much more common.
3) higher density in the 3.5" drives leads to typically higher performance overall. They tend to have higher random access time as well.
4) power efficiency in 2.5" drives (1~2.5W) is the only clearly better spec -- the lowest power 3.5" drives are something like 3.5W~6W.

You could try a 2-platter WD Green 1.5 TB -- and if you don't need the capacity, short stroke it to maybe 500gb for even better performance.
Thank you for that succinct overview.

Ok, so how about those 1.5 TB and 1 TB "EARS" variations? In addition to the 1.5 TB 2-platter version that you mentioned, there's also a 1 TB one:
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Intellipower-Desktop-WD10EARS/dp/B002U1N95K/ref=pd_cp_e_2
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Intellipower-Desktop-WD15EARS/dp/B002ZCXJZE/ref=dp_return_2?ie=UTF8&n=172282&s=electronics

Any plans to review those two as well?

EDIT: or is it safe to assume that these variants will have exactly the same characteristics, except capacity? But 1 less platter should make at least a little difference, right... ?

Agree, more reviews on those HD's.

Posted: **Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:18 pm**

DaRuSsIaMaN wrote:
MikeC wrote: 1) 2.5" drives may have lower vibration, but at this point, not lower noise. The latest WD Greens are amazing in both aspects.
2) 2.5" drives are not as durable as 3.5" ones in 24/7 operation, as they are designed for use in laptops where start/stop is much more common.
3) higher density in the 3.5" drives leads to typically higher performance overall. They tend to have higher random access time as well.
4) power efficiency in 2.5" drives (1~2.5W) is the only clearly better spec -- the lowest power 3.5" drives are something like 3.5W~6W.

You could try a 2-platter WD Green 1.5 TB -- and if you don't need the capacity, short stroke it to maybe 500gb for even better performance.
Thank you for that succinct overview.

I'm going to pull the trigger on the WD10EARS some time during the coming months. I'll let you know how noisy it is, but, unless SPCR reviews it, you must be patient
Ok, so how about those 1.5 TB and 1 TB "EARS" variations? In addition to the 1.5 TB 2-platter version that you mentioned, there's also a 1 TB one:
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Intellipower-Desktop-WD10EARS/dp/B002U1N95K/ref=pd_cp_e_2
http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Intellipower-Desktop-WD15EARS/dp/B002ZCXJZE/ref=dp_return_2?ie=UTF8&n=172282&s=electronics

Any plans to review those two as well?

EDIT: or is it safe to assume that these variants will have exactly the same characteristics, except capacity? But 1 less platter should make at least a little difference, right... ?

Posted: **Mon May 30, 2011 1:39 pm**

So 3TB drive will not work in my standard sata controller on MB? I use Win7 and don't need to boot from drive.

Posted: **Tue Oct 11, 2011 6:24 pm**

So I've been reading up a lot on the forums, and it seems that Samsung Spinpoint F4 2TB HD204UI is a very popular hard drive. Although I have also been looking at the wd20ears, and it seems that its a pretty kick ass drive. My only worry is that a lot of people are not advising to purchase this drive as an OS drive. Is the speed sufficient? I currently have a 7200rpm 320gb Seagate Barracuda, which i find the speed to be acceptable. Will these newer drives be comparable, namely the Samsung mentioned above, or the new WD Ears drives?

Posted: **Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:48 pm**

While the WD Greens are great for storage, they are not ideal for an OS-drive. If you have the money, go with an SSD for the OS and a quiet HDD (like the WD Green or the Samsung F4) for storage. If you want a HDD for both OS and storage then I would avoid the WD Greens due to the head park feature and maybe even go with a 7200RPM HDD since they have quicker seeks.

Posted: **Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:58 am**

Vicotnik wrote:While the WD Greens are great for storage, they are not ideal for an OS-drive. If you have the money, go with an SSD for the OS and a quiet HDD (like the WD Green or the Samsung F4) for storage. If you want a HDD for both OS and storage then I would avoid the WD Greens due to the head park feature and maybe even go with a 7200RPM HDD since they have quicker seeks.

I already have a 40gb intel SSD that I am using for my OS. I could probably just buy a WD or Samsung and store all my files. Thing is I play lots of games, and would like to have them all stored on it. Would they be decent drives for that task as well, or is the speed really slow?

Posted: **Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:17 am**

syrian_gamer wrote:I already have a 40gb intel SSD that I am using for my OS. I could probably just buy a WD or Samsung and store all my files. Thing is I play lots of games, and would like to have them all stored on it. Would they be decent drives for that task as well, or is the speed really slow?

The main speed difference in gameplay between an SSD vs a HDD is load time. Once it's in memory, there's no difference at all in the vast majority of games, as the storage is simply out of the picture. RAM, CPU & video card resources and performance dictate. So if you are willing to wait a little longer for the game to load, then the space and price advantage of today's HDDs are yours.

Same advice for HTPC users -- if you leave it on all the time (as most HTPC users do) and don't open/close apps all the time, there's really no advantage in an SSD.

Posted: **Wed Oct 12, 2011 10:07 am**

syrian_gamer wrote:or is the speed really slow?

Apart what MikeC says, at anyway, if you feel uncomfortable with a WD Green, you may give a look to the newest Hitachi drives: the 5K1000.B (1TB, 1 platter, 5400rpm), the 7K1000.D (1TB, 1 platter, 7200rpm), and the 5K3000 (1.5TB, 3 platters, 5900rpm, SPCR tested and approved the 2TB one), as they are significantly faster than the WDs with 750 or 600GB platters, with small (or sometimes no) noise penalty.

Posted: **Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:36 pm**

quest_for_silence wrote:
syrian_gamer wrote:or is the speed really slow?

Apart what MikeC says, at anyway, if you feel uncomfortable with a WD Green, you may give a look to the newest Hitachi drives: the 5K1000.B (1TB, 1 platter, 5400rpm), the 7K1000.D (1TB, 1 platter, 7200rpm), and the 5K3000 (1.5TB, 3 platters, 5900rpm, SPCR tested and approved the 2TB one), as they are significantly faster than the WDs with 750 or 600GB platters, with small (or sometimes no) noise penalty.

Are the Hitachi drives just as quiet as the WD Green drives?

Posted: **Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:50 pm**

syrian_gamer wrote:Are the Hitachi drives just as quiet as the WD Green drives?

According to SPCR Hitachi Deskstar 5K3000 2TB 5940RPM Hard Drive, it seems the WD Green are slightly quieter, but you also have the hitachis at 5940rpm so they should perform slightly better also.

Hitachi Deskstar 5K3000 2TB HDS5C3020ALA632 — Idle: 14~15 / Seek: 15 dBA@1m
Samsung EcoGreen F3 2TB HD203WI — Idle: 16 / Seek: 18~19 dBA@1m
Samsung EcoGreen F4 2TB HD204UI — Idle: 13 / Seek: 15 dBA@1m
Seagate Barracuda Green 2TB ST2000DL003 — Idle: 14~15 / Seek: 17~18 dBA@1m
Seagate Barracuda LP 2TB ST32000542AS — Idle: 15 / Seek: 17 dBA@1m
Western Digital Caviar Green 1.5TB WD15EADS — Idle: 13 / Seek (AAM/Normal): 14 dBA@1m
Western Digital Caviar Green 2TB WD20EADS — Idle: 13 / Seek (AAM): 13 / Seek: 13~14 dBA@1m

Posted: **Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:55 am**

syrian_gamer wrote:
quest_for_silence wrote:
syrian_gamer wrote:or is the speed really slow?

Apart what MikeC says, at anyway, if you feel uncomfortable with a WD Green, you may give a look to the newest Hitachi drives: the 5K1000.B (1TB, 1 platter, 5400rpm), the 7K1000.D (1TB, 1 platter, 7200rpm), and the 5K3000 (1.5TB, 3 platters, 5900rpm, SPCR tested and approved the 2TB one), as they are significantly faster than the WDs with 750 or 600GB platters, with small (or sometimes no) noise penalty.
Are the Hitachi drives just as quiet as the WD Green drives?

As already said:

quest_for_silence wrote:they are significantly faster than the WDs with 750 or 600GB platters with small (or sometimes no) noise penalty.

Posted: **Mon Oct 17, 2011 9:40 am**

A guy on overclock.net has got some of the new 7k1000d's already and have run some quick benches, and I've ordered a couple hoping they will be as quiet as they are fast.

Graphs and numbers here: http://www.overclock.net/hard-drives-st ... st15310588

Posted: **Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:34 am**

That is fast Hitachi have a good record on out doing the other makers def a step up from a WD black and a nice boost over a C model
I've just replaced a WD green 1TB with a 5k3000 2TB (repair job) as far as green drives go Hitachi own it now they're quiet, fast and a cut above the WD greens it's a better drive in every respect.

Of course WD and others might respond but right now 5k3000 is the HDD to beat best eco drive I've used to date.

SPCR

New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD

Re: New high density 2-and-3 TB Greens from WD