Early peek on Seagate Barracuda ATA III

[LXi]

Storagereview hasnt posted it yet, but I found the link...

http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200101/20010108ST340824A_1.html

 

[Biggs]

IBM 75GXP still reigns supreme. Any news on when the next generation IBM would come out? Is is still advisable to get a 75GXP today or wait for the next gen?

 

[bacillus]

seems Seagate technology is filtering down from its scsi drives to its ide brothers!

 

[LXi]

But oh my god, the transfer rates! Everything else sucked bad though, this is truely an abnormal example of hard drive performane.

 

[ragiepew]

Biggs-

The next IBM drive will be the 60gxp. This drive will feature a 7200rpm spindle speed, same access time as 75gxp, and ata100 support. The only main difference (as far as i know) is that it will have 20GB/platter as opposed to the 15GB/platter currently on the 75gxp. The higher density should provide for higher transfer rates so it will be interesting. Also, since it does have a higher density, the cost will go down (less platters) thus making it cheaper to manufacture and cheaper for us!

 

[Pariah]

What's so abnormal about the performance? This drive is the perfect example of why access time is far more important now than STR. This drive rivals the Seagate X15 and Quantum Atlas 10K II in STR yet gets trashed by current and past generation 7200RPM IDE drives in winbench and IOMeter.

 

[ragiepew]

Pariah is right on the money on this one... hell there has to be a reason why the X15 costs so damn much... o yea... that damn 3.9ms seek time... (5.9ms total access time)... compare that to the Cuda 3 and its ~15ms total access time...

 

[LXi]

What I meant by abnormal, is that they can manage a blistering transfer rate, but a poor seek time, generally hard drives either do well on both, or poorly on both, or so-so on both for that matter.

The X15's access time is 6.8 total, not 5.9.

 

[ragiepew]

LXi... how do you figure? 3.9ms seek time + 2ms latency = 5.9ms access time.

That is granted that you take into account their "quoted" seek time and thats what I'm doing... and I know seagate is known for over specing their seek times. Anyway, I was just quoting w/ their numbers... (if my numbers are wrong please let me know).