Seagate First With SATA 6Gb/sec. 2 TB Drive

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]tester24[/nom]Only the 10k and 15k drives run that hot. 7200 should be around the same temperature. Even the 3Gb 15k drives run hot so that wasn't a big surprise from the article[/citation]

no its not just the high rpm drives that run hot try also the 5400 and 7200rpm drives every seagate drive i have owned plus all my friends who have had seagates have have hot drives. plus several of those have overheated and failed due to overheating. so dont give me that bs where you say only high rpm drive from them run hot. they also make the hottest running notebook drive i know of.
 
[citation][nom]njkid3[/nom]no its not just the high rpm drives that run hot try also the 5400 and 7200rpm drives every seagate drive i have owned plus all my friends who have had seagates have have hot drives. plus several of those have overheated and failed due to overheating. so dont give me that bs where you say only high rpm drive from them run hot. they also make the hottest running notebook drive i know of.[/citation]

Then explain why in my grandfathers Computer I built, his two 500 gig seagates run at 19C.
 
I think I am going to wait... There always seems to be buggs with 1st gen stuff of a new tech. I can just see problems, much like when going from SATA1 to SATA2 and the jumper issues, IIRC, confused the hell out of people.
 
[citation][nom]Gin Fushicho[/nom]Then explain why in my grandfathers Computer I built, his two 500 gig seagates run at 19C.[/citation]

you either got lucky or have a decent cooling system
 
I find the temperature comments about hi surface temps interesting in light of this showing the Seagate has the lowest temp of any "full time" 7200 rpm drive.

Seagate 7200.12 37.00
Spinpoint F1 38.00
WD Caviar Black 43.00

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-3.5-desktop-hard-drive-charts/Drive-Surface-Temperature,1015.html

The reliability comments are also interesting given this:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/203178-32-which-reliable-hard-drive-brand

Each of those 3 drives has there advantages under certain conditions but blanket statements contrary to published data serve no one's best interests. Personally, the 138 64 MB cache, 5 year warranty and customizable firmware make a bigger splash in my mind than the 6 GB/s SATA burst speed
 
7200rpm drives that get hot are 3 years old, I think u guys are living in the past. I have a stack of them that get burning hot and they all were made in 2005-2006. All the new seagate I get in even the 7200.11 just get warm. Also you can get 5900rpm seagates now if you need it to run even cooler.
 
I'm confused, why do you need faster sata for raid?
I thought there was still only one drive per sata cable, and the final raid array was connected to the system via pci (pciX pci express ect.) If the whole array was connected to the system via a single sata link then I could see the problem, otherwise why does raid require more sata bandwidth?
 
[citation][nom]Matt87_50[/nom]If the whole array was connected to the system via a single sata link then I could see the problem, otherwise why does raid require more sata bandwidth?[/citation]
Yes, as in like an external network/server housing two or more drives via one eSATA cable. The more drives needed, the more the lanes would have to be split, which will divide bandwidth multiplied by the number of drives. Not all connections have one dedicated lane per device.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.