Performance of RMAd HDs?

thenew3

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2001
1,207
2
81
Has anyone done any comparison between a new HD and a refurbished (RMA'd) hd of the same model?

I've had the unfortunate luck of having to RMA 3 different HD's lately. One WD, one Maxtor and one IBM. all 7200 rpm.

Before they went back, on the same system under the same conditions, I recorded the sandra HD benchmark on all 3 HDs.

After I got them back from the RMA dept, I re-benched all 3 HDs. Although the RMA drives work fine, there seems to be a significant drop in performance. As much as 70% decrease in performance.

As I understand it, mfgs may need to map bad sectors on a platter to unused sectors during the refurbishing process. This mapping will cause extra head movement and thus more seek delay and poor performance.

I see many people selling RMA'd hds as if they were almost as good as new (many mention the fact that the drive is still sealed in antistatic bag fresh from RMA). When infact the drives are no where near as good as new. and the prices of these "fresh" RMA drives aren't that much cheaper then a new one would be.

Has anyone else noticed a big decrease in performance of RMAd HD's, and do people who buy these "fresh" RMA drives know that they are paying nearly new price for a drive that will perform noticeably worse then new?

Just curious that's all! :) thanks!
 

Nessism

Golden Member
Dec 2, 1999
1,619
1
81
I receintly received a refurbished IBM GPX75 to replace my failed drive. The refurb drive is as good as new. I'm not an expert but I fully expect that a properly rebuilt refurb drive should be just as good as a new one...well almost as good.

In the case of my drive, Sandra is fully up to speed. Of course, your milage may vary.

Ed
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
I have had mixed results.....With Maxtor always had great luck with my RMA's from WD tho


Ausm