Choosing between Barr V, 7200.7 and IBM 180GXP.....

simplex · Post by **simplex** » Thu May 01, 2003 5:48 am

Im thinking on buying a 120GB version or maybe the 160/180GB version.

Does anyone now if Barracuda 7200.7 is noisier than IBM 180GXP?

Clearly 180GXP is the faster...

Or should I start searching for a Barracuda V (they're getting more and more hard to find with this capacity)?

JEN · Post by **JEN** » Thu May 01, 2003 8:06 am

I dunno if this is true in everyones case but, i have had some bad experiences with IBM hard drives. I have also has a 6Gb Seagate, I still have it in my old computer and I have never had any problems with it. However, I also had an IBM Hard drive before that. I have it for about 1 year, and it broke at least 5 times!!! When I say "broke" I mean something happened to it which left the computer unbootable and I ended up loosing all my work

This is why, I never bought an "IBM anything" after that

Lithium · Post by **Lithium** » Thu May 01, 2003 8:17 am

I don't know WHY I bought my current IBM 40 gig in the first place... but I did and it's been pretty HORRIBLE.

It would have month long spats where I would audibly hear a few clicking, grinding noises and then I'd lock up. I'd panic, backup and prepare for the eventual crash... which never happened. Still the current drive I'm using today but I really have no faith or trust in the drive.

Dru · Post by **Dru** » Fri May 02, 2003 8:18 am

I bought an IBM 180GXP and returned it because of the "chirping" noise. It was a plenty fast drive, however. So, I would recommend the Barracuda 7200.7 or even the Barracuda V.

Back to IBM, I keep seeing deals now for the IBM/Hitachi drives. But from those who research on the net know about IBM's past. Sometimes people just don't forget especially when their data is at stake. My guess is Hitachi will try to rebuild the name on these drives but I think they are hurting hard from their past hard drive issues. I don't plan on buying IBM again. One can argue that the drive still has a warranty.

Let's put it this way, I'd rather take only a 1 year warranty on a drive that will be reliable than have a 3 year warranty on a drive that's more prone to fail.

simplex · Post by **simplex** » Fri May 02, 2003 10:42 am

Yes, I have heard about the IBM reputation, but have been told
the 180GXP are more safe than 120GXP (wich in itself was a step forward).

SO if I only choose between 120GB Barr V and 7200.7 (both 2MB, havent seen any test between the 2 and 8MB).... eeeh, what to do?

stunt03 · Post by **stunt03** » Fri May 02, 2003 10:55 am

i'm in the same situation simplex...
i posted a message but nobody is answering.
it's even more difficult for me because im looking at the 80gig level.
so i have to choose a single platter 7200.7 or a double platter V.
at least you know that the V is going to be quieter b/c it has acoustic management. Now you have to weigh in the proformance aspect. do you want speed or quietness.

As for IBM, the 75gxp and 60gxp (to some extent) had issues.
I love my ibm and would recommend them to anybody. Since the 60gxp the IBM's have matched and exceeded other HD manufacturers in terms or reliability. But people do hold grudges... look at the whole ati driver thing...Oh well.

I'd love to get my hands on a 180gxp and put acoustic management on it. It will rape any seagate.

I want to know how loud it really is though...real world.
I cant get it in Canada though...

I agree it is VERY confusing, i have no idea what to get and nobody is giving me feedback in my topic.

Good luck, i'll keep reading seeing how i am in the same boat

tragus · Post by **tragus** » Fri May 02, 2003 5:17 pm

stunt03 wrote:I'd love to get my hands on a 180gxp and put acoustic management on it. It will rape any seagate.

Well, I have an 180gxp and have turned on the AM. It still chirps, but otherwise is quite quiet. Virtually inaudible at idle, relatively soft in seeks. It's 120 MB and seems plenty fast for my home machine. I'm reasonably satisfied, so far. I consider the chirp an annoyance until I get some cash to get something else. OTOH, I'm not sure how to respond to your second, quoted statement.

At the lab, we need both speed and quiet, but will sacrifice for speed if necessary. The next system will be another RAID system, possibly dual Seagate SATAs or (if they live up to their promise) the new Maxtors. When we do recording, we stream 6 to 24 channels at 30 Khz sample rate real-time each for up to several hours. That's a lot of data!

Liquidated · Post by **Liquidated** » Fri May 02, 2003 6:14 pm

I've personally had 2 ibm drives...
a 27ish GB 34GXP form long long ago and a 60ish GB 120GXP from more recent (got it real cheap since by then because IBM's rep was shot).

I currently have both running side by side in my pc and have never once had problems with them ever. They are like the ibm's of old.

as far as I can tell the 180GXP should be fine from a reliability standpoint.

Cheers!
-Liq

JEN · Post by **JEN** » Mon May 05, 2003 4:30 am

Is there any difference in noice levels between the Barracuda V series. i.e. do the 40Gb, 60Gb, 80Gb, and 120Gb V series Barrcuda drives make the same amount of noise?

Model numbers

ST340017A 40 GB
ST360015A 60 GB
ST380023A 80 GB
ST3120023A 120 GB

Post by **MikeC** » Mon May 05, 2003 8:35 am

# of platters - the more the noisier. that's it.

Athlon Powers · Post by **Athlon Powers** » Mon May 05, 2003 1:38 pm

Well, the 7200.7 (V) is about 5DB louder idle than the IV.

simplex · Post by **simplex** » Tue May 06, 2003 1:59 pm

>>Well, the 7200.7 (V) is about 5DB louder idle than the IV.

Sorry, but Im not sure I know what you mean by
7200.7 (V).

The barracuda V and 7200.7 is to different drives and
if you have seen a comparison between them please
tell me where to find it.

Im interested in usual things, their difference in noise and speed.

Comparison between the 7200.7 and the IV model is available though.

silenx · Post by **silenx** » Tue May 06, 2003 3:34 pm

The difference between the V and 7200.7 seems to be the lack of acoustical management features and seashield in the latter. Otherwise, the two models are very similar. The V was limited to 60GB per platter, the 7200.7 takes it further to 80GB per platter. Noise levels between the two seem to be very similar, speedwise, the 7200.7 has notably better access time and slightly higher transfer rates (mostly due to higher data densities on the platters).

lacsap · Post by **lacsap** » Wed May 07, 2003 5:02 am

Have a look at http://www.storagereview.com/

In october 2002, they had a review of the Seagate Barracuda V. And they compare it to the IV, IBM 120GXP, Maxtor and WD Caviar.

Yomat · Post by **Yomat** » Wed May 07, 2003 9:14 am

I'm a bit confused. Is there no possibility to do accoustic management whatsoever on 7200.7? Or does it only apply to SATA.. or was that for CudaV ? Would appreciate if someone with exact knowledge would clear this up.

I know from somewhere that the CudaIVs was set to low-noise accoustic management by default.

silenx · Post by **silenx** » Wed May 07, 2003 10:33 am

Manuals for the Cuda IV, V and 7200.7:

http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/man ... 29212b.pdf
http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/man ... ata_pm.pdf
http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/man ... 7200pm.pdf

They all have the ability to use acoustic management. Sound levels are provided in the specifications in both the quiet and performance seek modes. Apparently it is possible. If you look at the sound specs, the difference between the 7200.7 and the Cuda IV is within 1 dBA. Nevertheless, you do require a utility tool to set the AAM settings.

Alistair · Post by **Alistair** » Wed May 07, 2003 12:48 pm

silenx wrote:They all have the ability to use acoustic management.

Incorrect. Barracuda SATA drives do not currently support the AAM (acoustic management software) and people here who have these drives are complaining they are much louder.

for more info see threads:
http://forums.silentpcreview.com/viewtopic.php?t=3964
http://forums.silentpcreview.com/viewtopic.php?t=4093

ian1234 · Post by **ian1234** » Thu May 15, 2003 5:39 pm

Hi,

That's right, both the V and 7200.7 SATA drives, despite what it may say in the manuals, don't have AAM. Also, the 7200.7 is noticeably and annoyingly louder than the V so I would recommend the SATA V ... except that I was told by a Seagate representative that it will be discontinued due to the patent issue ...

http://forums.silentpcreview.com/viewto ... 13ba336823

jinu117 · Post by **jinu117** » Fri May 16, 2003 3:18 am

digitalix wrote:And to think, IBM was a leader in HDD ... Now their hard drives went to hell and got bought out by a Japanese company, what can I say...

And the royal sony, toyota, honda customers are? Besides, I'd like to find 1 person in this forum who actually used 180GXP and had problem with it. Step up...

pingu666 · Post by **pingu666** » Fri May 16, 2003 2:40 pm

my pata 7200.7 is very quiet...
ill see if it has aam sometime

1HandClapping · Post by **1HandClapping** » Fri May 16, 2003 3:47 pm

I've avoided Seagate since the mid to late 80's when we had a stack of dead Seagates literally over four feet high! We had about a 90% failure rate on Seagates during that stretch of time. We actually started using them as door stops.

Quantum's used to be the reliabel HDs but my last two failed.

I've had 3 IBMS in my last two computers and they have been fine.

I heard that there was one series of IBM's that IBM this bad rep.

It has been my recent interest in quiet computing that has made me even consider Seagate again.

chiahaochang · Post by **chiahaochang** » Mon May 19, 2003 10:11 am

1HandClapping wrote:I heard that there was one series of IBM's that IBM this bad rep.

The DeskStar 75GXP line, often called the DeathStar 75GXP due to an unusually high failure rate. That said, I had two of them in RAID0 for years w/o problem. They're currently still in service in my brother's PC (in non-RAID).

ian1234 wrote:Also, the 7200.7 is noticeably and annoyingly louder than the V so I would recommend the SATA V

I don't have nor have heard the V, but I do have a 160GB 7200.7 and two (1x 40GB, 1x 80GB) IVs. The 7200.7's seek is noticably louder than the IVs. I've had both the 80GB IV and 7200.7 suspended in the same case (at different times) and I can still hear the 7200.7 seek, while I couldn't hear the IV seek at all. The 7200.7's seek noise is just barely audible. I don't hear any bearing/spindle whine on either.

pingu666 · Post by **pingu666** » Mon May 19, 2003 2:03 pm

that goes with my experience, but never had a iv

Choosing between Barr V, 7200.7 and IBM 180GXP.....

Choosing between Barr V, 7200.7 and IBM 180GXP.....

IBM deathstars...

Ironic

Re: Ironic