Western Digital 500GB RE2
- Thread starter Rob Williams
- Start date
Jakal
Tech Monkey
Impressive! I've never had a Seagate hard drive, no particular reason. I've always heard good things about them, I've just never bought one. When the price war comes along I've always found WD to be cheaper than Seagate. WD is no less of a product and I've been very happy with every one I've bought. I had to RMA the Maxtor I bought for my last pc. Ended up picking the WD Caviar 80Gb IDE in it's place.
Do you have to use their connector? If you do, then definitely a knock against it.
The charts you've posted. You might want to list what the numbers on the left mean. I know they mean milliseconds, and score (for the benchmarks), but someone who isn't as tech savvy and just looking at the review may not.
Do you have to use their connector? If you do, then definitely a knock against it.
The charts you've posted. You might want to list what the numbers on the left mean. I know they mean milliseconds, and score (for the benchmarks), but someone who isn't as tech savvy and just looking at the review may not.
Will add text underneath each graph. I didn't think to add it earlier. No, you are not obligated to use their connector... it's just much sturdier than the flimsy ones you get with motherboards. It also helps use up your spare Molex 4-Pins I guess, hehe.
U
Unregistered
Guest
Comparison?
It would also make the comparison meaningful if you gave the specification of the Seagate you are comparing the WD with.
Is it a 7200.10/9/8/7 or ??. Is it an 8Mb or 16Mb cache model?
Thanks.
It would also make the comparison meaningful if you gave the specification of the Seagate you are comparing the WD with.
Is it a 7200.10/9/8/7 or ??. Is it an 8Mb or 16Mb cache model?
Thanks.
Sorry, I meant to link to the review of the drive. There are only two 500GB Seagates... an IDE and S-ATA. Both have the same storage capacity, RPM and cache. Only real addition is NCQ. Will update the review to link to the review.
U
Unregistered
Guest
Thanks Rob
It's as I thought from the results, the latest top of the line Enterprise Class WD is actually pitted against the last years spec Personal Storage Class Seagate, which was always going to be a WD win.
I look forward to a comparison with the new 7200.10 version of the Seagate which is still a Personal Storage Drive and priced accordingly (10-15% less than the RE2 and nearer to the SE16) or maybe with one of Seagates Enterprise drives (ES or NL35?).
Sorry, but it's a bit like comparing last years family saloon against the latest premium saloon.
I look forward to the re-match
Thanks for the update Rob.
It's as I thought from the results, the latest top of the line Enterprise Class WD is actually pitted against the last years spec Personal Storage Class Seagate, which was always going to be a WD win.
I look forward to a comparison with the new 7200.10 version of the Seagate which is still a Personal Storage Drive and priced accordingly (10-15% less than the RE2 and nearer to the SE16) or maybe with one of Seagates Enterprise drives (ES or NL35?).
Sorry, but it's a bit like comparing last years family saloon against the latest premium saloon.
I look forward to the re-match
The only 7200.10 I have is in my main machine, which is why I didn't use it. If I had a 500GB 7200.10 on hand, it would have been used. Since I don't, it's not possible.
Sorry if you disagree, but both drives are still in the same pricerange, so I felt it was a fair comparison.
Sorry if you disagree, but both drives are still in the same pricerange, so I felt it was a fair comparison.
madmat
Soup Nazi
Thanks for the update Rob.
It's as I thought from the results, the latest top of the line Enterprise Class WD is actually pitted against the last years spec Personal Storage Class Seagate, which was always going to be a WD win.
I look forward to a comparison with the new 7200.10 version of the Seagate which is still a Personal Storage Drive and priced accordingly (10-15% less than the RE2 and nearer to the SE16) or maybe with one of Seagates Enterprise drives (ES or NL35?).
Sorry, but it's a bit like comparing last years family saloon against the latest premium saloon.
I look forward to the re-match
I hate to break it to you but the 7200.10 version is still priced $60 above the cost of the RE2 and $70 above the cost of the SE so it might be more competitive in terms of specs but not in price.
I must admit though that I'm interested in seeing how they'd fare against one another.
T
TechTAK
Guest
Best in it's class...ONLY in it's class!
Y'all have to realize that there aren't many other drives with the same technologies as this one.
I host a small talk radio tech show, and ended up with a couple to test. I really haven't seen anything better in it's class. And I tested this against newer drives and it held it's own. It's not ALWAYS the fastest, but this drive isn't MEANT to be the fastest, it's meant to be the best for RAID, and as far as SATA drives are concerned, it doesn't get any better...
Y'all have to realize that there aren't many other drives with the same technologies as this one.
I host a small talk radio tech show, and ended up with a couple to test. I really haven't seen anything better in it's class. And I tested this against newer drives and it held it's own. It's not ALWAYS the fastest, but this drive isn't MEANT to be the fastest, it's meant to be the best for RAID, and as far as SATA drives are concerned, it doesn't get any better...