Intel Retail Edge Summer deal (starts May31)

[bryanW1995]

Nice cover to go after the ssd info and conveniently leave out the seagate data. Isn't that lying by omission?

Here's a link with power draw of the 7200.4 from tomshardware:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/mobile-hdd-notebook,2305-14.html

Here's a link to tomshardware's 520 series review:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-520-sandforce-review-benchmark,3124-8.html

Same website. And there's certainly nothing on there to make somebody think that the 7200.4 is significantly more power efficient than the 520 series, whether at idle or load. The only real "knock" on the 520 series is that it is a bit more power hungry at idle relative to other ssd's. Let's say that the difference is .3w greater for the 520 series (and almost .2w less than your current hdd btw). What's your total system power draw at idle? At load? Unless you can answer those questions then it's impossible to say things like "the 520 series consumes too much power for a laptop".

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Nice cover to go after the ssd info and conveniently leave out the seagate data. Isn't that lying by omission?

Here's a link with power draw of the 7200.4 from tomshardware:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/mobile-hdd-notebook,2305-14.html

Here's a link to tomshardware's 520 series review:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-520-sandforce-review-benchmark,3124-8.html

Same website. And there's certainly nothing on there to make somebody think that the 7200.4 is significantly more power efficient than the 520 series, whether at idle or load. The only real "knock" on the 520 series is that it is a bit more power hungry at idle relative to other ssd's. Let's say that the difference is .3w greater for the 520 series (and almost .2w less than your current hdd btw). What's your total system power draw at idle? At load? Unless you can answer those questions then it's impossible to say things like "the 520 series consumes too much power for a laptop".

If you're gonna do HDD/SSD comparisons use a site that's dedicated to that. StorageReview is better for this kind of thing than Tom's or Anandtech, just like JonnyGuru is better for Power Supply reviews. Anyway:

That's the same drive except the slightly higher areal density, and you can see at idle it consumes an amount similar to the SSD 520/330. And I never said the 7200.4 is more efficient. If you bothered to read instead of accusing people of FUD, I said:

In terms of power consumption it's similar to the SSD 330 and SSD 520, which I find too high especially since it's only an HDD and therefore responsiveness isn't nearly as good as an SSD.

Meaning: I find the HDD's power usage too high, and I wouldn't go with a 330 or 520 because I'd make no improvements there in idle which is the state it will be in most of the time.

1.35V RAM also makes a difference, and since my laptop supports it that's what I'll go with next. Right now, it consumes 6W at idle and 8W doing normal web browsing. Going with a Samsung 830 already means a difference of 1/2 a watt in comparison to either the HDD I have now or the SSD 330. The m4 would mean a small reduction in idle usage, and comparable to other SSDs in read/write power usage (which would make it better than the HDD in that area). Going with 8GB of 1.35V RAM should mean another 0.3W-0.5W in terms of power reduction, so all in all anywhere from 0.5W to 1W saved constantly. Given it already consumes 8W in normal usage, that means 7-14% higher battery life doing web browsing.

If you still don't get it: 1/2 a watt of difference coming from a single component in a laptop makes a HUGE difference.