1 TB HDD - Samsung VS Others

[d0ntcar3]

I've noticed that most people in builds are using a Samsung Spinpoint F3.

Just curious if this is just a price thing or it's a great drive. Vs something like a WD Caviar Black?


Looking at my next build and I'm going to be replacing everything. So just curious on the Samsung drive.

Thanks.

 

[Roark]

For the 1TB I generally put in order WD Cav Black > Sammy F3 > SG Cudda.
That is also the price order.

I'm glad you posted though because I always re-research to make sure I don't make a total jacka..something of myself.

Apparently I've got my order mixed up (performance not price wise), atleast according to bit-tech's Iometer results.
Review - Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB Review | bit-tech.net

I think a lot of people were turned off to Seagate because of the failure rate of the 7200.11.
Apparently things have been fixed with the 7200.12 and they're undercutting the F3 by ~$5 to get customers back.

I'm not sure where exactly the Cav Black falls, but reading the 1TB is under-performing compared to the 2TB.
By how much I can't say but I would assume its still on top of the pack, if even by a very small margin.

Regardless, the drives all have similar performance and, with exception of the 7200.11, decent track records.

Probably going to start suggestion the Barracuda 7200.12 now

*Edit - Always reading.
The Cav Black (1TB) is still missing from most comparisons, but a lot go:
F3 = Cav Blk (2TB) > 7200.12; or F3 > Cav Blk (2TB) > 7200.12

Honestly its mostly benchmarks, in real world application I doubt you'd notice much difference.
I do feel justified in suggesting the F3 though, as it is a fair price for a good drive.

 

[S0ULphIRE]

Yarr, Barricuda 7200.12's are extremely decent. Buy 'em for our servers at work, for my servers at home, for storage at home, etc etc. yeah I liek 'em. I had one arrive DOA recently, but that's the only failure so far (except for one that blew up in a dodgy dock I had).

Cav Blacks IMO aren't worth it these days, too much of a price premium for just the name. They're **** good drives to be sure, but the price? Not justifiable IMO over the .12's or F3's

 

[iFargle]

I'm a Seagate fan as well... two 1.5TB 7200.11 drives and two 1TB 7200.11 drives Had the oldest one for about... four years now. Still nothing wrong with it at all

 

[MyGodAL3X]

This thread just changed my point of view, after a bit of research I too have found WD to be expensive and not much (if any) performance gain.
Thanks to you all, will now start up with Seagate.

 

[Roark]

I won't lie, all the stuff I read about the high rates of the 7200.11 bricking itself made me a little paranoid.

Probably going to stick to the F3 for 1TB but, since they don't seem to make a <1TB F3, go with Cav Blacks or 7200.12 for those.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

I won't lie, all the stuff I read about the high rates of the 7200.11 bricking itself made me a little paranoid.

Probably going to stick to the F3 for 1TB but, since they don't seem to make a <1TB F3, go with Cav Blacks or 7200.12 for those.

Same here, I haven't bought a Seagate drive since then.

Honestly I wouldn't touch a >1TB drive either, most of them have pretty poor reputations.

 

[Slaymate]

The last few regular HDD I've purchased were Seagates

 

[S0ULphIRE]

Same here, I haven't bought a Seagate drive since then.

Honestly I wouldn't touch a >1TB drive either, most of them have pretty poor reputations.

In years previous, definitely. Multiple platters were a big issue. These days with 1Tb+ drives coming on single platters or only two platters, it's much better (not to mention all the other obvious improvements along the way)