• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

IBM Deskstar 120GXP Review @ Storage Review



<< the 120GXP's multiple capacity points offer more flexibility than WD's "120 gig only" entry >>


I really like that 8 meg buffer WD JB drive, but 120 Gig only and the $$ tag to match keeps me away from it. I really with they had a less expensive 60 Gig version.
 
oldfart, that's one reason why I opted for the 80GB 120GXP. In addition, the performance of the drive is astounding.
 
Transfer performance really drops off when you fill the thing > 40 GB and is especially poor when the drive is near capacity. Of course this is common to all drives but the JB doesn't sag nearly as much.

The WD1200JB looks to reign supreme overall. That's my next upgrade.
 
i just received a 120GXP 20gb and i can't come near the benchmarks indicated.
i'm wondering if it's my bios or something. (kr7a).
x
 
I just bought the WD1200JB , it rocks, fast and quiet. Highly recomended, was going to get the IBM as I have 3 already, but the problems reported now kept me away from them.
The 8 meg cache on the WD is great.
 
I'd have to go with the IBM's for only one reason.

I'd much rather have two 40's or 60's on seperate channels than 1 big 120GB drive.
And two WD 100 or 120GB drives are too much.

Damn you WD for not making some smaller 8MB cache drives.
 


<< I'd much rather have two 40's or 60's on seperate channels than 1 big 120GB drive. >>

Why is that? Do you transfer a lot of files around?
 


<< Why is that? Do you transfer a lot of files around? >>



Most definately. Lots of photo work.
Plus its nice to have a 'work' drive. While it's being used for burning, playing mp3's, etc.
You can use the 1st drive for something else.

To me for what I do, its better to have two seperate drives than even dual proc's.
Makes the system seem much faster.

 


<< To me for what I do, its better to have two seperate drives than even dual proc's. >>

Makes sense as copying across channels is noticably quicker. Of course you could get two 120 GB drives and have the ultimate solution at the ultimate price.

I have a feeling hard drives will continue to explode in size over the next year. So unless one really needs the capacity it's better to wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top