Who makes the best harddrive?
- Thread starter Lowlypawn
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Hard Drives
mpjesse
Splendid
- Dec 31, 2007
- 7,214
- 0
- 25,810
I'd go with IBM too... Seagate (back in the day) used to make the best hard drives, now they've disappeared off the market (with the exception of SCSI drives). IBM has always been consistent too. Maxtor used to make the worst drives... now they're ok.
-MP Jesse
-MP Jesse
yoda271828
Distinguished
- Dec 31, 2007
- 527
- 0
- 18,980
Definitely IBM but i can't agree about Western Digital. I build computers and I used to use western digitals because of their reputation. But the systems come back after about a year with a bad hard drive....it's like clockwork. But I have yet to have a bad IBM....not to mention they're the fastest, quietest drives on the market.
We're all happy with our IBM drives. I have a 20GB ATA66 7200RPM, my brother has 2 of the same in RAID 0 using a Promise Fastrak card and my sister has a 40GB 75GXP ATA100 drive on a Promise Ultra 100 card. For some reason the HPT366 controller on her Abit BE6 MB doesn't like ATA100 drives even when set at ATA66.
I agree with jkrud on the WD aspect. Out of 5 machines I have built with WD hard drives, 3 have had to have the HD replaced when they were about a year old. It is almost like clockwork.
I will purchase IBM drives as long as they continue the quality they are producing now. Great hard drives. I have three of them across two machines.
Brian
PS I have also had bad luck with maxtor and quantum
I will purchase IBM drives as long as they continue the quality they are producing now. Great hard drives. I have three of them across two machines.
Brian
PS I have also had bad luck with maxtor and quantum
What makes Maxtors that bad? They are the cheapest but is there something horrible about them that offsets the price advantage?
Don't get me wrong! Maxtor makes good HDDs, but IBM makes the best high-end HDDs (75GXP series) for the time being.
yoda271828
Distinguished
- Dec 31, 2007
- 527
- 0
- 18,980
This was the question:
<i>What manufacture makes the best 7200 ultra 100/ata (around 30 gigs and fast but not SCSI) hard drive?
Are there and manufactures u would not buy?</i>
I'd bet he wants something that costs less than the rest of his computer components combined
<i>What manufacture makes the best 7200 ultra 100/ata (around 30 gigs and fast but not SCSI) hard drive?
Are there and manufactures u would not buy?</i>
I'd bet he wants something that costs less than the rest of his computer components combined
In the defense of WD i have had a 850mg 1.6g, 3.2g and now a 10g and cant remember having any problems with any of them. Call it luck. Don't get me wrong i am not making recommendation for any particular drive, just thought i should mention my experiences. I entend my next to be an IBM, hopefully i will gain a bit of performance with it.
I like my current 2 WD`s drives fine, but the reviews and stats about the IBM 75 GXP are making it my next choice (unless i go SCSI..still up in the air there) The prices are even getting real competitive for it. Checkout www.accubyte.com last i saw they had a killer deal on the IBM 75 GXPs, and try mentioning www.pricewatch.com to them for an extra discount (im dying to see if that really works...its supposed to~!) Even at a small, or even if its a medium sized increase in price for the IBMs, id say spend the extra few bucks..theyll be worth it.
Rama
" He who (BLEEPS) nuns, will later join the church " Joe Strummer, The Clash - "Death or Glory"
Rama
" He who (BLEEPS) nuns, will later join the church " Joe Strummer, The Clash - "Death or Glory"
Well... how about 36.4 GB LW 10K rpm # 07N3200 SCSI Hard Drive from IBM.
You can get real good price,if you buy +20pcs of more at... well...
You can get real good price,if you buy +20pcs of more at... well...
My experiences: 486PC - Seagate 230 meg...fine but slow, Pentium 166 - Seagate 2 gig 5400 very reliable, no errors/bad sectors, fine at first but past year it has slowed down a lot, added WD 1.2 4500 Gig slave - reliable and very slow, all JTS Corp. dead corporation = dead drives, Quantum fireball 1.3 gig - very old and was on its last legs...lasted me 4 minutes, My uncles computer - WD 6.4 gig ata-33 died in 3 years...got a brand new replacement straight from WD in 3 weeks, label said made Nov 26, 2000 so it was customed just for me! ....died in 2 days. Current self-built Athlon kx133: retail store Maxtor Plus 20.4 gig 7200 2meg buffer 66....the best drive i've had so far...very fast. Self built system for friend: Pent. III 800 w/ apollo pro133a Maxtor Plus 30 gig 7200 rpm 2mb buffer 66...he love's the hd caching speed. My school computer PIII 550 AbitVA-6 Apollo pro 133 w/ 10 gig Seagate ata66 5400 rpm 512k buffer....slow, but reliable. Just wanted to give my life experience although i never had the money for IBM drive like all u guys.
IBM = ?, but it seems the best quality for $$$
WD = Slow, reliable for some drives, then they break on you
Maxtor = cheap, fast, big platters, no problems so far
Seagate = slow, expensive, not seen much, but very very reliable
Quantum = not sure...but on the lower end of the scale
Fujitsu = heard they make speedy drives, but never shown its face really
BIG TIP: To keep your hard drive more alive...shut down your computer daily/overnight or at least HD power down to save the life of it... it only has so many hours and more its used...more it wears and tears (bad clusters/sectors, slower)
IBM = ?, but it seems the best quality for $$$
WD = Slow, reliable for some drives, then they break on you
Maxtor = cheap, fast, big platters, no problems so far
Seagate = slow, expensive, not seen much, but very very reliable
Quantum = not sure...but on the lower end of the scale
Fujitsu = heard they make speedy drives, but never shown its face really
BIG TIP: To keep your hard drive more alive...shut down your computer daily/overnight or at least HD power down to save the life of it... it only has so many hours and more its used...more it wears and tears (bad clusters/sectors, slower)
I've used just about every major manufacturer of IDE drives out there..and quite of the few SCSIs.
I'll go with the majority of the other posts. IBM has been producing "quality" and always competitive performing IDE drives since it started focusing on that market with their Deskstar line. I still think their SCSI drives are of high quality as well, although they are not the best performers.
WD - One of the only drives I had a serious complete death(no warning signs, no nothing just died)was a WD digital Conner IDE. I'm not saying their quality hasn't improved. I just think the drive's true face shows over time.
Maxtor - I just can't bring myself to use any of the newer drives they have come out with that received so much press, because they produced some of the crappiest low quality drives in the early 90s (yet still expensive). Again, one of those manufactured drives where I'm afraid it's true face might show over time.
Seagate - I haven't used their higher end IDE Barracuda drives. I've used a lot of their Medalist drives and they reak in quality and performance (but they are cheap, so what do you expect). The Barracuda IDEs might be ok, but they will not perform up to the IBM. And I think they are a company that still puts a lot of their focus on the SCSI market. (So does IBM, but they have more resources to do so. And while Seagate SCSI drives tend to outperfrom equivalent IBM SCSI.. I still think the quality of IBM is better, which just reinforces my belief that IBM puts out the best quality and when looking at IDE they are putting out the best performers as well).
Quantum - I like their Fireball IDE drives, but they just tend to run a little hot and LOUD. Quantum definitely rules in the loudest drive category for IDE and SCSI. And though they are decent performers and I've never had a problem with em, they're still not to IBM's level. Did I mention they were loud?
Fujitsu - I've used some of their older 5400 RPM drives. They were reliable and they were quiet. Performance was par or sub-par and I think they're newer drives will follow suit.
Samsung - I haven't used any of their drives they've thrown into the market. But you will find em.. Reviews of them are usually sub-par performance. I have no clue on reliability. Wouldn't be surprised to see Toshiba get into the fray..
"BIG TIP: To keep your hard drive more alive...shut down your computer daily/overnight or at least HD power down to save the life of it... it only has so many hours and more its used...more it wears and tears (bad clusters/sectors, slower)"
I'd like to comment on that, maybe have you think about it. I think a lot of people who are knowledgeable about hardware will disagree with it. A hard drive not including easily replaceable fans is the only moving part in your PC. And although all parts can suffer from what is called thermal stress, the hard drive suffers the worst from it. This is the process of heating something up so that it expands and cooling it down where it contracts. Now drives are designed to work within a certain temperature. In a good ventilated system, they're should be no problem operating it within that temperature range. So if I had to compare which does more wear and tear.. that being spinning a drive up daily from 0 to 5400-10000 rpms and heating it up from room temp to 35-50 deg C juxtaposed to running it constantly at it's designed operating temp, I would say the former and not the latter. You used to find MTBF as the main reliability rating for almost all drives. I now see a lot more of start stop times. It's shift in what's important. Who cares how long the drive can run if the major factor in it's lifespan is how often it's started and stopped, which is what the average user does. Funny I still see MTBF used alot on SCSI drive specs where SCSI drives are used on systems that are not constantly shutdown and restarted. And the mentioned WD drive that just failed ..was on a system that was "daily" shut down and booted again the next day. A drive may have only so many hours, but today's drives have an MTBF of 800,000 to 1,000,000 hours (that obviously not accurately tested, but if they would stamp it in the specs, manufacturers are probably confident in the drive's ability to run mores hours than you could use) .. and you used to get retail with 5 yr warranties. Means IBM is guaranteeing my 9LZX running constantly for 5 years.. is warrantied. I think they are confident it can handle that. Moreover, the shorter warranties on IDE drives and the shift to start stops means they aren't as confident it can handle the amount of spin ups the average hard drive on a desktop has to go through. There's a lot of individuals that would probably agree that your hard drive will suffer less if you just leave it running all the time.
I'll go with the majority of the other posts. IBM has been producing "quality" and always competitive performing IDE drives since it started focusing on that market with their Deskstar line. I still think their SCSI drives are of high quality as well, although they are not the best performers.
WD - One of the only drives I had a serious complete death(no warning signs, no nothing just died)was a WD digital Conner IDE. I'm not saying their quality hasn't improved. I just think the drive's true face shows over time.
Maxtor - I just can't bring myself to use any of the newer drives they have come out with that received so much press, because they produced some of the crappiest low quality drives in the early 90s (yet still expensive). Again, one of those manufactured drives where I'm afraid it's true face might show over time.
Seagate - I haven't used their higher end IDE Barracuda drives. I've used a lot of their Medalist drives and they reak in quality and performance (but they are cheap, so what do you expect). The Barracuda IDEs might be ok, but they will not perform up to the IBM. And I think they are a company that still puts a lot of their focus on the SCSI market. (So does IBM, but they have more resources to do so. And while Seagate SCSI drives tend to outperfrom equivalent IBM SCSI.. I still think the quality of IBM is better, which just reinforces my belief that IBM puts out the best quality and when looking at IDE they are putting out the best performers as well).
Quantum - I like their Fireball IDE drives, but they just tend to run a little hot and LOUD. Quantum definitely rules in the loudest drive category for IDE and SCSI. And though they are decent performers and I've never had a problem with em, they're still not to IBM's level. Did I mention they were loud?
Fujitsu - I've used some of their older 5400 RPM drives. They were reliable and they were quiet. Performance was par or sub-par and I think they're newer drives will follow suit.
Samsung - I haven't used any of their drives they've thrown into the market. But you will find em.. Reviews of them are usually sub-par performance. I have no clue on reliability. Wouldn't be surprised to see Toshiba get into the fray..
"BIG TIP: To keep your hard drive more alive...shut down your computer daily/overnight or at least HD power down to save the life of it... it only has so many hours and more its used...more it wears and tears (bad clusters/sectors, slower)"
I'd like to comment on that, maybe have you think about it. I think a lot of people who are knowledgeable about hardware will disagree with it. A hard drive not including easily replaceable fans is the only moving part in your PC. And although all parts can suffer from what is called thermal stress, the hard drive suffers the worst from it. This is the process of heating something up so that it expands and cooling it down where it contracts. Now drives are designed to work within a certain temperature. In a good ventilated system, they're should be no problem operating it within that temperature range. So if I had to compare which does more wear and tear.. that being spinning a drive up daily from 0 to 5400-10000 rpms and heating it up from room temp to 35-50 deg C juxtaposed to running it constantly at it's designed operating temp, I would say the former and not the latter. You used to find MTBF as the main reliability rating for almost all drives. I now see a lot more of start stop times. It's shift in what's important. Who cares how long the drive can run if the major factor in it's lifespan is how often it's started and stopped, which is what the average user does. Funny I still see MTBF used alot on SCSI drive specs where SCSI drives are used on systems that are not constantly shutdown and restarted. And the mentioned WD drive that just failed ..was on a system that was "daily" shut down and booted again the next day. A drive may have only so many hours, but today's drives have an MTBF of 800,000 to 1,000,000 hours (that obviously not accurately tested, but if they would stamp it in the specs, manufacturers are probably confident in the drive's ability to run mores hours than you could use) .. and you used to get retail with 5 yr warranties. Means IBM is guaranteeing my 9LZX running constantly for 5 years.. is warrantied. I think they are confident it can handle that. Moreover, the shorter warranties on IDE drives and the shift to start stops means they aren't as confident it can handle the amount of spin ups the average hard drive on a desktop has to go through. There's a lot of individuals that would probably agree that your hard drive will suffer less if you just leave it running all the time.
what are you talking about? seagate still makes good ide drives. toms hardware did a review on a seagate drive and it was one of the better performers. i got a 20 gig 7200 rpm for 112$, best hard drive I've ever had.
I havn't tried IBM, and from the reviews above, they need no further endorsement anyway, But for my money
Seagate.
They had a few problems, but they seem fixed now, if you got a good seagate, you'll die before it does.
And i havn't used many of the new Maxtor drives, i have had to support systems with them and i am juck of having to replace them. They may be cheaper, but myu past experience has found them to be terribly unreliable. And anything that is even remotely likely to compromise either mine, or worse, my clients data isn't worth 20 cents. If i am puting a drive into PC and it dies, I recieve the blame and my name gets smeared, not the manufacturer of the FUBAR drive, the consumer doesn't want to know. When i put a drive in, i know it will go till the earth stops turning. Cos it's a seagate.
Seagate.
They had a few problems, but they seem fixed now, if you got a good seagate, you'll die before it does.
And i havn't used many of the new Maxtor drives, i have had to support systems with them and i am juck of having to replace them. They may be cheaper, but myu past experience has found them to be terribly unreliable. And anything that is even remotely likely to compromise either mine, or worse, my clients data isn't worth 20 cents. If i am puting a drive into PC and it dies, I recieve the blame and my name gets smeared, not the manufacturer of the FUBAR drive, the consumer doesn't want to know. When i put a drive in, i know it will go till the earth stops turning. Cos it's a seagate.
IBM is definetly number one. I recently purchased 2 IBM 30Gb ATA 100 7200rpm drives and they are working perfectly, never seen a HDD so fast.(even on an Asus A7V Mb on the ATA 100 controller. Thanks to everone who posted info on the problems concerning this MB, AMD processor situation in Win2K it saved me alot of stress)
I bought two IBM IDE drives in late 1997 when ATA 33 first came out. A 4.3Gb system disk and a 6.4Gb disk for video (I think it was the largest IDE drive at the time)i used them almost everyday for three years doing video editing, multimedia CD-ROM production and audio mixing. Especially with the video the drives were pushed to their maximum sustained data rate for lengthy periods. I never had the slightest bit of trouble with either of them.
I still use them now on one of my office computers.
I used to build video editing workstations and tried many different brands (IBM, Maxtor, WD, Quantum, Seagate) of HDD but always returned to IBM because:
1. I occaisionally recieved drives that were DOA or died within a few days of use from every manufacturer except IBM and Seagate.
2. IBM IDE drives always outperfomed the other brands
3. No customer ever had a HDD related problem with systems that used IBM drives
4. they were and still are good value
Seagate SCSI drives did perform better than IBM ones but with IDE IBM was the champ.
As far as bad drives go. I would never use a Samsung drive. I ve known 4 people who owned systems with samsung drives and all of them, within a year have had problems (data loss, bad sectors etc), not including the horrible performance and very load crunching noise. Addmitedly i don't know the samsung product range but assume that they were all low end drives, they're current high end drives may be better.
Cheers
I bought two IBM IDE drives in late 1997 when ATA 33 first came out. A 4.3Gb system disk and a 6.4Gb disk for video (I think it was the largest IDE drive at the time)i used them almost everyday for three years doing video editing, multimedia CD-ROM production and audio mixing. Especially with the video the drives were pushed to their maximum sustained data rate for lengthy periods. I never had the slightest bit of trouble with either of them.
I still use them now on one of my office computers.
I used to build video editing workstations and tried many different brands (IBM, Maxtor, WD, Quantum, Seagate) of HDD but always returned to IBM because:
1. I occaisionally recieved drives that were DOA or died within a few days of use from every manufacturer except IBM and Seagate.
2. IBM IDE drives always outperfomed the other brands
3. No customer ever had a HDD related problem with systems that used IBM drives
4. they were and still are good value
Seagate SCSI drives did perform better than IBM ones but with IDE IBM was the champ.
As far as bad drives go. I would never use a Samsung drive. I ve known 4 people who owned systems with samsung drives and all of them, within a year have had problems (data loss, bad sectors etc), not including the horrible performance and very load crunching noise. Addmitedly i don't know the samsung product range but assume that they were all low end drives, they're current high end drives may be better.
Cheers
Right now there's no beating the IBM 75GXP.
I work on large networks, and I've used every major brand of drive since 1995. In my five years as a computer professional, I've seen more dead WD drives than anything else--probably more dead WDs than IBM, Maxtor, Quantum, and Seagate combined. I don't have as much experience with Fujitsus and Samsungs--I've only seen about 30 of each, as opposed to hundreds of the other brands. But in those batches I haven't had any failures.
I usually stick with Quantum and Maxtor because they consistently give an outstanding combination of price, performance, and reliability. Nothing against IBM--they make great stuff--but that's what I usually buy. Right now the 75GXP is so much better than anything else out there, though, that if I were to buy a drive now, that's what I'd get. It's only a few dollars more than Maxtor's closest offering.
I don't know where Maxtor got its bad reputation, because I've always had great luck with them. The drives they were making in the mid-90s weren't very fast, but they were reliable. Recent Maxtors are extremely fast, however. I know everyone says Western Digital makes the best drives, but my experience just doesn't jive with that.
---
Dave Farquhar
Author, <i>Optimizing Windows for Games, Graphics and Multimedia</i> (O'Reilly)
<A HREF="http://thesiliconunderground.editthispage.com" target="_new">http://thesiliconunderground.editthispage.com</A>
I work on large networks, and I've used every major brand of drive since 1995. In my five years as a computer professional, I've seen more dead WD drives than anything else--probably more dead WDs than IBM, Maxtor, Quantum, and Seagate combined. I don't have as much experience with Fujitsus and Samsungs--I've only seen about 30 of each, as opposed to hundreds of the other brands. But in those batches I haven't had any failures.
I usually stick with Quantum and Maxtor because they consistently give an outstanding combination of price, performance, and reliability. Nothing against IBM--they make great stuff--but that's what I usually buy. Right now the 75GXP is so much better than anything else out there, though, that if I were to buy a drive now, that's what I'd get. It's only a few dollars more than Maxtor's closest offering.
I don't know where Maxtor got its bad reputation, because I've always had great luck with them. The drives they were making in the mid-90s weren't very fast, but they were reliable. Recent Maxtors are extremely fast, however. I know everyone says Western Digital makes the best drives, but my experience just doesn't jive with that.
---
Dave Farquhar
Author, <i>Optimizing Windows for Games, Graphics and Multimedia</i> (O'Reilly)
<A HREF="http://thesiliconunderground.editthispage.com" target="_new">http://thesiliconunderground.editthispage.com</A>
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
[SOLVED] Is it safe to use a recapped PSU for a long time ?- Started by zwtch_17
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 3K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram