IBM DeskStar 75GXP or Quantum AS???

[hagbard]

There's been quite a few problems reported with the current IBM drives, I own one and have experienced some funkiness myself, but I seems to work fine. Take a look in the comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage newsgroup before making a decision. Or in Storage Review. Seem to be a lot of reports of bad sectors with this drive (got a few myself). I'm good about backing up, so I'm not overly concerned (and IBM is aware of the issue and has been very helpful, unlike some hardware companies...eg: Antec).

...hag

 

[j@cko]

if your drive is defected, you can RMA it, because I posted a smiliar question here before about RMA of IBM. People's impression seemed to be quite satisify of their service. It's another question I am going to go with IBM.

 

[Phuz]

hagbard: every drive has problems, and every manufactures support sites are pllayed with them.

 

[PCResources]

<< every drive has problems, and every manufactures support sites are pllayed with them >>



Well, i agree somewhat with that statement, but IBM drives (the 75GXP series mostly) do have incompatibility issues with many controllers, plus their QC is BAD, way too many RMA/DMA... IBM should know better...

Maybe they spent more money on marketing than on QC, and that's probably why many people feel that IBM's are great, even if there are too many faulty drives..

As i have testec more than 60 000 drives, i should know this, but you will believe whatever you want to believe, nothing much i can do about that.. I just state what i KNOW, not my opinion...

Unfortunently no one can be told about the stability of IBM drives, you have to see it for yourself, take the RED pill, and i will show you just how deep the rabbit hole goes... Anyone knows where i took those lines from?


Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources

 

[j@cko]

that's pretty lame... The Matrix.. the not the movie lame but the way you ask question, sounds like you're so special... j/k
anyway, if you have tested so many drives, which one in your opinion is the fastest, queitest?

 

[PCResources]

<< the not the movie lame but the way you ask question, sounds like you're so special... j/k >>



Well, &quot;the not the movie lame&quot;?? sounds like i am special huh? Well, i am... and so are you...

The best drives right now are the DM+60's and that's it...

IBM drives are not as good as other drives, but better than WD, everything is better than WD, even my old Nec is better than WD....


Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources

 

[PCResources]

<< It's another question I am going to go with IBM. >>



You decided right from the start didn't you?? And you really hated me when i didn't have the same opinion as you, now didn't you...

I'm not saying that other drives are problem free, it's just that i have concluded that there were more problems with the 75GXP series than any other drive (not counting WD, i gave up on them a long time ago, but will test new models and revisions)....

So i do not recommend the IBM drives, after testing that many drives, i do believe i have the right to make this claim: IBM drives are crappy!!!.... Is that lame too??

Patrick Palm

Am not speaking for PC Resources

 

[hagbard]

That's true Phuz, all I'm suggesting is that he do a bit of research first. I'm pointing out that I've seen an awful lot of posts regarding problems with their newer drives. Now, this could be accounted for by the large volume sold(seems like everyone is buying them), or it could be a real problem with the current drives. Like I said, check out the newsgroups (better yet, run a search in Deja News on &quot;75GXP&quot; and &quot;bad sectors&quot; and see what it brings up).

For the record, I think IBM makes great hardware and has about the best support in the industry today. I also think they may have slipped on this one.

...hag

 

[hagbard]

PCResources - have you noticed an almost religious like devotion some people display regarding their computer hardware? I notice it most accutely when I criticised Antec for their complete lack of customer support (and lies), they all come out of the woodwork. Don't even try bringing up any issues with someone's favourate video card ;-)

...hag

 

[PCResources]

<< favourate video card >>



I already did that, and i think i won the discussion too...

I have quite a bit of experience to put behind my statements, so people will usually bend when i tell them why i think so...

But if anyone will not take my word for it, well, then good luck, i am mot a brand freak, if you want it, get it, if you are happy with it, then that's just great... I just recommend things that i know of, from the experience that i have..

Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources

 

[Soccerman]

I'd have to agree with Leo, the LM is one of the best drives out (still).

that is also what storage review says..

the IBM 75GXP and Quantum LM are STILL at the top of the heap overall. the newer generation drives (20 gig/platter ones) are generally a disappointment when it comes to overall performance, becuase they appear to be all over the place, not consistant.

so, if you really must get a hard drive now, I still suggest a Quantum LM (over an IBM 75GXP, becuase it doesn't have as many problems from what I can tell in terms of compatability).

what drive should you look forward to? well the only shining light in the IDE department that I can see, is IBM's 60GXP series, using 20 gigs/platter density, at 7200 RPM.

just look at the reviews of the latest IDE drives at storage review. they don't even put the LM into the performance comparison chart, because it is not the 'current generation of drives', yet it simply annihilates the others in terms of access time.

go and compare the LM and IBM 75GXP vs the Quantum AS and Maxtor drives here. or if you're lazy, follow these links:
Quantum Fireball Plus AS
Fujitsu's 20 Gig/platter drive
Quantum Fireball Plus LM
IBM 75GXP

notice how the transfer rate of the 75GXP is actually a bit FASTER at the start of the track then the Quantum AS? and at the end, it is a bit slower. also, it's access time is 12.4 (which when you subtract the rotational latency gives you 8.2 ms), whereas the Quantum AS is at 13.2 (actually WORSE then the specs claim).

ACCESS TIME is critical to Windows operating system use. which is why SCSI drives are much faster in that area, rather then trying to stay leagues ahead of IDE in terms of transfer rates, they work almost solely on access time.

the Quantum LM is rated at 8.5 ms access time, but actually (accounting for platter rotation) runs LOWER, at about 7 ms, becoming FASTER then some SCSI 7200 RPM drives.

also notice that at the end of the track, the LM is extremely fast, achieving rates almost as fast as the Quantum Fireball AS (though the beginning track isn't the same story).

 

[DeathroweR]

.

I would still get the Quantum AS.

Not because it's faster, quieter or bigger - just because I trust them.


Stupid, eh?

 

[Syborg1211]

I wouldn't get either. I am waiting for the 60gxp which is coming out soon. It is going to have faster transfer rates, shorter seek times, and better overall performance.

 

[j@cko]

<< I wouldn't get either. I am waiting for the 60gxp which is coming out soon. It is going to have faster transfer rates, shorter seek times, and better overall performance. >>


you don't know what you are talking about, don't ya?
Faster transfer rates, shorter seek times? Where in the heaven or world did you learn that? The only difference of 60 series is its platter density, 20GB per disk instead of 15gb of 75 series...

 

[j@cko]

.......

 

[LXi]

<<what drive should you look forward to? well the only shining light in the IDE department that I can see, is IBM's 60GXP series, using 20 gigs/platter density, at 7200 RPM.>>

You gotta have eye sight problems not to see the Maxtor DM+60 as a shining light. Its got very fast seeks, 0.2ms slower than spec, its transfer rates and winmarks are better than IBM's. Considering that its a 60GB version, comparing it to IBM's drive in the same class which is the 75GB version of the 75GXP, its actually faster in access time. The 60GXP can be an interesting one, but I doubt it will break the grounds set by the 75GXP, plus there is absolutley no word on when they'll arrive. My advice is get the DM+60 or Fireball Plus AS.

 

[Soccerman]

hmm, I must have missed it? where is it on Storage Review?

EDIT: nevermind, I might have found it.. I'll take a look.

 

[LXi]

Currently the fastest 20GB platter 7200rpm hard drive...

http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200101/200101195T060H6_1.html

 

[Vinny N]

ewww on the Maxtor access times...

http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200004/20000413QM330000LM-A_2.html

The Quantum Fireball+LM as previous mentioned spanks it

Heck even the Seagate Barracuda ATA II has better seek times...

Too much emphasis on platter density and STR these days...

 

[LXi]

Ewwww on the best seek time in the 20GB platter arena? I dont understand you people, should we stick to LM forever just because its got that godly seek?

In the 20GB class, Maxtor is faster than Quantum, faster than Seagate Cuda III(this is truely ewww!), faster than WD 400BB in seek time.

 

[Soccerman]

ahh, in it's platter density class, yeah it is currently best.

notice how they compared it to the 75GXP 75 gigabyte version? the one with the worse access times then the 45 version found here.

the 45 gigabyte version of the 75GXP line beats the Maxtor drive in access times, and is close to the Maxtor 60 gig in speed at the beginning of the track, however at the end, the 75GXP drops off. also notice that the Quantum LM beats the 75GXP at the end of the track?

windows was based on alot of files, not one single sequential file. why should the hard drive be built for single sequential files, when the OS never has been?

that's partially the basis on why SCSI is used still, fast response time is critical.

though it would definetly be nice if we could see a 20gig/platter drive hit Quantum LM access speeds, that won't really happen if you ask me anymore, because not only has QUANTUM moved away from that for IDE drives, but no-one else really ever focused on it in the first place in that arena.

 

[Syborg1211]

<< you don't know what you are talking about, don't ya?
Faster transfer rates, shorter seek times? Where in the heaven or world did you learn that? The only difference of 60 series is its platter density, 20GB per disk instead of 15gb of 75 series... >>



I have done my rading on the 60 gxp so don't give me crap about not knowing what I am talking about. There is going to be a difference and more overall increased performance. You know why? You said it yourself. 20gb per disk instead of 15gb is going to be a slight improvement in itself because it will make the drives more quiet with less platters and with the less amount of platters the seek times will drop a tad bit too...