HDDs: Seagate Or Maxtor

[Malladine]

yeah, should have added a poll huh?

 

[Zrom999]

I have a both type of drives in my system, Barracuda V 60GB and 2 Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 8 40GB. They sound different (Seagate has a very low rumbling sound when active and the maxtors have a low whine), but the difference in the noise level is not really that noticable (The 2 maxtors are louder but they are in RAID 0). I would have to put my ear near the case to hear them anyway. The Barracuda drive performs slightly below average according to SiS SANDRA scores, so you might want another drive if you want a little more performance.

 

[ElFenix]

seagate

<---tired of RMA'ing maxtors

 

[CraigRT]

Seagate for sure.
I've sent off so many Maxtors lately for RMA.. don't hear too much bad about Seagate I must say.
the Seagates I do have work just fine.

 

[Markfw]

One thing to keep in mind: The maxtor 8 series were a little loud (I have 4 of those) the new Seagate series is very quiet (everyone seems to agree), but it is the NEW Maxtor 8 meg cache fluid bearing drive that I have 2 of that are almost as quiet as the Seagates. (6Y080P0) I also have one IBM (hope it doesn't die, A 75gxp deathstar), and one Quantum. The last two drives I had die, were a Western digital and a Quantum.

 

[fkloster]

HDDs: Seagate Or Maxtor

Seagate beyond a shadow of any doubt...

 

[masterxfob]

you guys must be fvcking near deaf if you can't hear the difference between a seagate and a WD/Maxtor HD! while the WD/Maxtor may hold a slight performance advantage, that's nothing compared to the quietness of the Seagate. or simply, go with Seagate if sound if at all a factor.

 

[stultus]

This is turning into a better flame war than Intel vs AMD!

 

[Ardan]

I have that 80Gb Seagate drive you listed and it is NOT slow. Those who say it is, mustn't have used it. I have an 80Gb Western Digital Special Edition drive in the other computer (athlon xp 1600+) and this is an athlon xp 1800+@2000+ speed (Thoroughbred core) and there is no noticable difference to my eyes. I am a heavy gamer, and I dabble with video, graphics and especially audio. That 7200.7 drive is NOT slow...hell, in benchmarks I've done, it was faster than the WD drive in the other computer. In some it is slower, but those are BENCHMARKS. In real life I can tell a difference. It takes 5 seconds to load Windows XP on this machine, and 7 seconds on the other one. It also is loading Battlefield: 1942, Counter-Strike, Splinter Cell and Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast faster than the 1600+. I have underclocked it to the same speed to be certain, and the difference remains. It is a noticable difference to my eyes and in multiplayer games, I am generally the first person into the servers. If people say 'no, you're wrong' then I would gladly time the loads and repost them. If I were you, I would go for the Western Digital 80gig instead. I have many Maxtors and I love them, but the latest DM+9's...I have heard mixed reactions about them from people I know that have them. Glad I could help!

P.S.
I wouldn't return this reliable, quiet, and fast Seagate drive for any other!

Edit: If anyone senses hostility in the post, it is misplaced because I did not intend it to be that way.

 

[Malladine]

Some valuable info here for me anyways, flame war or not.

And I don't think it's that bad. I can see the benefits of both manufacturers. However, having owned only maxtors myself (and had no problems), if I do choose Seagate, it will be because I want to try something new!

So as far as i'm concerned the benefits are as follows:

Seagate: Quiet(er?) and new.
Maxtor: Fast(er?) and proven.

Although I have to say I agree with what Markfw is trying to say, that the 6Y080P0 has fluid bearings just like the Seagates and therefore it is feasible that it is as quiet as a similar Seagate.

I'm torn between the Barracuda 7200.7 and the Diamondmax Plus 9 6Y080P0 right now.

 

[stultus]

The 'cuda IVs are a couple years old now, and I'd say they are proven. Your comment makes it sound like nobody knows if they'll fail or not (if that's not how you intended it, my bad )

I've never had to RMA a Seagate, but I have had to RMA Maxtors. Seagates have consistently been quiet and trustworthy, while I've had a ~4 whiny Maxtors. My $0.02.

EDIT: I also have a 60gig not-8-meg-cache Maxtor (but still new enough to have ATA133) with fluid bearings, and it is louder than my Seagates (I have the Maxtor in my TiVo).

 

[Malladine]

No, that isn't how I intended it to come out at all, I was merely pointing out my lack of personal experience with Seagates.

Thanks for your $.02

 

[Jeff7181]

You're right that synthetic benchmarks aren't particularly indicative of real world performance... but if you look at reviews here on anandtech, they don't just show PCMark2002 scores... they show transfer rates, seek times, averages. And while an average transfer rate of 40 MB per second may not mean a whole lot... when compared to other drives, it helps you distinguish which drive will perform better. And I don't know about you, but if I'm going to spend $150 on a hard drive, I want the most I can get for my money.

*EDIT* Also... with the hard drive being about the 3rd slowest componant in the computer, it's no place to skimp... people often make that mistake, and I think it results in a lot of people being unhappy with a CPU or RAM upgrade. Perfect example... my room mate at college didn't know much about computers, he was only concerned about hard drive storage space... so he had a 40 GB hard drive... 5400 RPM, and a 14 ms seek time. Needless to say, when he upgraded to a P4 1.8 Ghz processor with 512 MB of RDRAM, the computer still felt slow and sluggish. Maybe nobody here would make that big of an oversight, but that's beside the point. My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades.

 

[Malladine]

My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades

Agreed.

I've always been cautious about HDD purchases, hence this thread

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You're right that synthetic benchmarks aren't particularly indicative of real world performance... but if you look at reviews here on anandtech, they don't just show PCMark2002 scores... they show transfer rates, seek times, averages. And while an average transfer rate of 40 MB per second may not mean a whole lot... when compared to other drives, it helps you distinguish which drive will perform better. And I don't know about you, but if I'm going to spend $150 on a hard drive, I want the most I can get for my money.

*EDIT* Also... with the hard drive being about the 3rd slowest componant in the computer, it's no place to skimp... people often make that mistake, and I think it results in a lot of people being unhappy with a CPU or RAM upgrade. Perfect example... my room mate at college didn't know much about computers, he was only concerned about hard drive storage space... so he had a 40 GB hard drive... 5400 RPM, and a 14 ms seek time. Needless to say, when he upgraded to a P4 1.8 Ghz processor with 512 MB of RDRAM, the computer still felt slow and sluggish. Maybe nobody here would make that big of an oversight, but that's beside the point. My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades.

the third slowest? what are the other 2???

As far as the reviews go, my general feeling is that they don't really give you a good idea of what you're going to experience, unless you fit neatly within the video-editing or office-productivity sectors. I suppose you can make an educated guess based on stats, but I've found that many times my personal experiences deviate substantially from the relative values placed by the reviewers.

 

[masterxfob]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You're right that synthetic benchmarks aren't particularly indicative of real world performance... but if you look at reviews here on anandtech, they don't just show PCMark2002 scores... they show transfer rates, seek times, averages. And while an average transfer rate of 40 MB per second may not mean a whole lot... when compared to other drives, it helps you distinguish which drive will perform better. And I don't know about you, but if I'm going to spend $150 on a hard drive, I want the most I can get for my money.

*EDIT* Also... with the hard drive being about the 3rd slowest componant in the computer, it's no place to skimp... people often make that mistake, and I think it results in a lot of people being unhappy with a CPU or RAM upgrade. Perfect example... my room mate at college didn't know much about computers, he was only concerned about hard drive storage space... so he had a 40 GB hard drive... 5400 RPM, and a 14 ms seek time. Needless to say, when he upgraded to a P4 1.8 Ghz processor with 512 MB of RDRAM, the computer still felt slow and sluggish. Maybe nobody here would make that big of an oversight, but that's beside the point. My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades.

OMG, you're a genius :Q

 

[S0me1X]

I have a 6Y080P0 also. It is has three acoustic managment modes (diabled, low noise, high performance) In my Lan-boy clone case, the drive is quite noisy when acoustic management is disabled or on high perf. The noise is not so much constant whine as little buzzes when seeking.

However, the drive is not noisy at all in my SLK3700AMB (because of rubber gromets).

 

[pukemon]

Originally posted by: Malladine
Some valuable info here for me anyways, flame war or not.

And I don't think it's that bad. I can see the benefits of both manufacturers. However, having owned only maxtors myself (and had no problems), if I do choose Seagate, it will be because I want to try something new!

So as far as i'm concerned the benefits are as follows:

Seagate: Quiet(er?) and new.
Maxtor: Fast(er?) and proven.

Although I have to say I agree with what Markfw is trying to say, that the 6Y080P0 has fluid bearings just like the Seagates and therefore it is feasible that it is as quiet as a similar Seagate.

I'm torn between the Barracuda 7200.7 and the Diamondmax Plus 9 6Y080P0 right now.

The new Maxtor seems to be a good compromise between noise and performance. At this point, get whichever is cheaper and more accessible to you and hope for some hot deals to pop up.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: isaacmacdonald

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You're right that synthetic benchmarks aren't particularly indicative of real world performance... but if you look at reviews here on anandtech, they don't just show PCMark2002 scores... they show transfer rates, seek times, averages. And while an average transfer rate of 40 MB per second may not mean a whole lot... when compared to other drives, it helps you distinguish which drive will perform better. And I don't know about you, but if I'm going to spend $150 on a hard drive, I want the most I can get for my money.

*EDIT* Also... with the hard drive being about the 3rd slowest componant in the computer, it's no place to skimp... people often make that mistake, and I think it results in a lot of people being unhappy with a CPU or RAM upgrade. Perfect example... my room mate at college didn't know much about computers, he was only concerned about hard drive storage space... so he had a 40 GB hard drive... 5400 RPM, and a 14 ms seek time. Needless to say, when he upgraded to a P4 1.8 Ghz processor with 512 MB of RDRAM, the computer still felt slow and sluggish. Maybe nobody here would make that big of an oversight, but that's beside the point. My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades.

the third slowest? what are the other 2???

As far as the reviews go, my general feeling is that they don't really give you a good idea of what you're going to experience, unless you fit neatly within the video-editing or office-productivity sectors. I suppose you can make an educated guess based on stats, but I've found that many times my personal experiences deviate substantially from the relative values placed by the reviewers.

Other 2 would be CD-ROM drives and MOST internet connections. And the floppy drive of course... but none of those are necessary to have a working computer.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: masterxfob

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You're right that synthetic benchmarks aren't particularly indicative of real world performance... but if you look at reviews here on anandtech, they don't just show PCMark2002 scores... they show transfer rates, seek times, averages. And while an average transfer rate of 40 MB per second may not mean a whole lot... when compared to other drives, it helps you distinguish which drive will perform better. And I don't know about you, but if I'm going to spend $150 on a hard drive, I want the most I can get for my money.

*EDIT* Also... with the hard drive being about the 3rd slowest componant in the computer, it's no place to skimp... people often make that mistake, and I think it results in a lot of people being unhappy with a CPU or RAM upgrade. Perfect example... my room mate at college didn't know much about computers, he was only concerned about hard drive storage space... so he had a 40 GB hard drive... 5400 RPM, and a 14 ms seek time. Needless to say, when he upgraded to a P4 1.8 Ghz processor with 512 MB of RDRAM, the computer still felt slow and sluggish. Maybe nobody here would make that big of an oversight, but that's beside the point. My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades.

OMG, you're a genius :Q

If that was a compliment, thank you... if it was sarcasm, go to hell.

 

[masterxfob]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: masterxfob

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You're right that synthetic benchmarks aren't particularly indicative of real world performance... but if you look at reviews here on anandtech, they don't just show PCMark2002 scores... they show transfer rates, seek times, averages. And while an average transfer rate of 40 MB per second may not mean a whole lot... when compared to other drives, it helps you distinguish which drive will perform better. And I don't know about you, but if I'm going to spend $150 on a hard drive, I want the most I can get for my money.

*EDIT* Also... with the hard drive being about the 3rd slowest componant in the computer, it's no place to skimp... people often make that mistake, and I think it results in a lot of people being unhappy with a CPU or RAM upgrade. Perfect example... my room mate at college didn't know much about computers, he was only concerned about hard drive storage space... so he had a 40 GB hard drive... 5400 RPM, and a 14 ms seek time. Needless to say, when he upgraded to a P4 1.8 Ghz processor with 512 MB of RDRAM, the computer still felt slow and sluggish. Maybe nobody here would make that big of an oversight, but that's beside the point. My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades.

OMG, you're a genius :Q

If that was a compliment, thank you... if it was sarcasm, go to hell.

i guess i'm going to hell

 

[sharkeeper]

With louder systems, HDD noise is of little concern! Go for speed and reliability!

-DAK-

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: masterxfob

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: masterxfob

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
You're right that synthetic benchmarks aren't particularly indicative of real world performance... but if you look at reviews here on anandtech, they don't just show PCMark2002 scores... they show transfer rates, seek times, averages. And while an average transfer rate of 40 MB per second may not mean a whole lot... when compared to other drives, it helps you distinguish which drive will perform better. And I don't know about you, but if I'm going to spend $150 on a hard drive, I want the most I can get for my money.

*EDIT* Also... with the hard drive being about the 3rd slowest componant in the computer, it's no place to skimp... people often make that mistake, and I think it results in a lot of people being unhappy with a CPU or RAM upgrade. Perfect example... my room mate at college didn't know much about computers, he was only concerned about hard drive storage space... so he had a 40 GB hard drive... 5400 RPM, and a 14 ms seek time. Needless to say, when he upgraded to a P4 1.8 Ghz processor with 512 MB of RDRAM, the computer still felt slow and sluggish. Maybe nobody here would make that big of an oversight, but that's beside the point. My point in this "edit" is, hard drives are one of the most overlooked upgrades.

OMG, you're a genius :Q

If that was a compliment, thank you... if it was sarcasm, go to hell.

i guess i'm going to hell

Thank you very much for your extremely informative post then. I'm sure it helped Malladine decide what to do.

 

[venturer126]

The performance of the 8MB cache makes the biggest difference in Hard drives. If you look at Western Digital 8MB Special edition versions, there is a significant increase in performance vs. the 2MB WD version. Therefore, the 8MB for the Maxtor is well worth the extra $ vs the Seagate with 2MB version.

 

[nick1985]

i like seagate

i have 2, both are good.

1 is about a year and a half