WD SATA II 250GB 16MB buffer $120 shipped

[RideFree]

ZipZoomFly.

This is a SATA II.

 

[carbine15]

i believe its "out the door" not to the door.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: carbine15
i believe its "out the door" not to the door.

"Out the door" would refer to a B&M purchase or one made in-store. Since this is online, shipping must be considered, therefore "to the door" is correct as it includes shipping charges.

 

[andyfasthands]

hot?

 

[Samus]

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: carbine15
i believe its "out the door" not to the door.

"Out the door" would refer to a B&M purchase or one made in-store. Since this is online, shipping must be considered, therefore "to the door" is correct as it includes shipping charges.

pwned

 

[carbine15]

oh yeah, i never thought of that. But to the question. Is it hot? $1 less than monarch after shipping.. so someone peed in the pool warm.

 

[serialkiller]

how does sataII work is it similar to any sata? would it work on a abit nf7-s v2?

 

[fbrdphreak]

That is hawt and SO tempting

 

[serialkiller]

does anybody know if sataII will work as long as your mobo supports sata? Or does your mobo have to support sataII?

 

[flyingboujanero]

I'm amazed that noone pointed out that at 48cents per MB, this would be quite pricey.

 

[BurnItDwn]

48 cents per GB not per MB.

48 cents per MB would mean the 120 GB drive is $480 per GB or nearly $60000.

that would not be a good deal...

 

[hans007]

western digital drives dont have ncq yet right?

 

[CyberZenn]

"WD actually labels the drive "SATA II" since it implements the 300 MB/sec transfer rates found in the SATA-2 spec. Regrettably, despite the "SATA II" moniker, the WD2500KS does not implement SATA Native Command Queuing (NCQ)."

Conclusion:

"Unfortunately, despite the decent gains, the WD2500KS lacks the pizzazz to match offerings from Maxtor and Hitachi test after test. The drive's 250 GB capacity, while nothing to sneeze at for most uses, also trails the 300+ GB capacities of the competition. As a result, when continuing to seek the absolute best in 7200 RPM performance and space, power users should continue to look to the MaXLine III and Deskstar 7K400. Further, the lack of an NCQ implementation remains disappointing."

from here:

http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200507/20050705WD2500KS_1.html

On a related note, I would kill a man for a Sata II compliant Raptor.

 

[RideFree]

I believe the WD "JS" series has "true" SATA II specs, including NCQ. This, being a "KS", lacks NCQ.
If this is not correct, blame the following sentence.
The ref. to "GB vs. MB" and "out the door" pickyness of this group of perfectionists will [not][/b] be corrected.

 

[RideFree]

Originally posted by: serialkiller
does anybody know if sataII will work as long as your mobo supports sata? Or does your mobo have to support sataII?

I'm guessing that this WD2500KS will do either.
(Hitachi IIs, on the other hand, come enabled for SATA 150 and require a "reset" via software to attain 3.0)
Copied from the WD web site.
"SecureConnect? ? provides a 500 percent stronger cable-to-drive connection than first-generation SATA hard drives and cables. Also ensures backward compatibility with legacy SATA cables and backplanes.

 

[flyingboujanero]

Originally posted by: RideFree
I believe the WD "JS" series has "true" SATA II specs, including NCQ. This, being a "KS", lacks NCQ.
If this is not correct, blame the following sentence.
The ref. to "GB vs. MB" and "out the door" pickyness of this group of perfectionists will [not][/b] be corrected.

Sorry, was just teasing about the MB thing, cuz stuff like that always gets pointed out.

Thanks for the deal. need another SATA drive, and glad to see this is backward compatible!

 

[RideFree]

If you know anything about me, it is that I'm never serious when a humoroid will do as nicely.
My reply was, in the words of Chun, "A feeble attempt at humor."

 

[RideFree]

...need another SATA drive, and glad to see this is backward compatible!

Please allow another confirmation regarding "backward compatibility" to surface b4 tripping the cc on this.
Did S/R have anything to say on this topic?

 

[NiKeFiDO]

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
48 cents per GB not per MB.

48 cents per MB would mean the 120 GB drive is $480 per GB or nearly $60000.

that would not be a good deal...

pwned x2 (for the record i was gonna post this also but checked to see if you guys caught it first)

 

[serialkiller]

im lost... but thanks ridefree

 

[Tsunami982]

personally, i think that if you are going to buy an sataII drive, it should have NCQ. if its just for storage then just buy a PATA at .20/GB or better.

 

[Tambora]

Bought this drive from Newegg in mid-August. It is quick and quiet. From all I've read the value of NCQ for a desktop pc is open for debate. For an enterprise server it is a plus to have NCQ.

 

[feelingshorter]

Originally posted by: Tambora
Bought this drive from Newegg in mid-August. It is quick and quiet. From all I've read the value of NCQ for a desktop pc is open for debate. For an enterprise server it is a plus to have NCQ.

indeed...NCQ can even sometimes lower performance quite a bit when it comes to desktop