Seagate, IBm or Western Digital?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

CrazyClocker

Junior Member
Jan 19, 2002
16
0
0
Hello everybody,

I should buy a new HDD! only 1gigs free, now, he.
so, which do u prefer? IBM 180GXP 120gigs, WD 120GB Special Edition 8MB or Seagate cuda 5 120GB???
Which harddisk is the fastest and most powerfull?

thanks for help,
cya
 
D

Darien

Platinum Member
Feb 27, 2002
2,817
1
0
Quick, nondetailed comparison that will probably get flaimed for no links to exact storagereview.com pages (so now you know where to go ;))

Performance: WD > IBM > Seagate

Noise: WD > IBM > Seagate

Temperature: IBM > Seagate > WD
 
B

Bovinicus

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2001
3,145
0
0
Western Digital has the best performance, though the IBM drive is close. Seagate is significantly slower.

The Seagate drives are totally silent. The IBM drive is virtually silent as well. The WD drive is near silent, possibly silent if your case fans are loud enough.

The IBM drive gets hotter than the WD and Seagate which run near the same heat level.
 
B

BassDominator

Senior member
Feb 8, 2001
346
0
0
I think WD and IBM are pretty neck-and-neck for performance.... so I'd be more influenced by price. I've had experience with both and have never been disappointed. I have to say that the new IBM drives are virtually silent when not being accessed.... if you're fans are quiet, you'll barely be able to tell if the computer is on or off. Just my two bits....
 
T

tk149

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2002
7,253
1
0
Don't forget to compare the warranties. All the big HD makers switched to lousy one-year warranties recently for their lower-end drives. But I know that Western Digital still offers a full 3-year warranty on their "Special Edition" drives. I think some of the Seagate SCSI drives still have 3-year warranties too.

There was a thread about this here on AT somewhere awhile back.

 
C

CraigRT

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
31,440
5
0
I'd get the WD or the Seagate over the IBM....

Deathstar? who wants to own one of those... great job in the past with failure rate IBM! look what it does to consumers... u'll never see an IBM drive in my machine.

WD is fastest, Seagate is not as fast.... so many drives are so similar to the end user thesedays, just buy whatever has best warranty and price if you are not brand loyal or have a preference already.
 
C

casper911

Member
Jul 28, 2002
35
0
0
i have bad experiance with maxtor, i had 2 HDD fail in one year. the Maxtor manufaturing factory just few kilometers away from my house but they never alllow me to exchange directly but instead asking me to go the place where i bought the drive which is few hundred kilometers away.

and also they take weeks to reply mail and exchange the drive!
 
O

OulOat

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2002
5,769
0
0
I like Maxtors RMA policy, really fast and nice. But anyways, I think it doesn't really matter which HD you get, the performance difference will be minimal. WD SE will be the fastest, but only by a few secs on CERTAIN applications (if you are just doing normal stuff it won't be noticably faster). It's really not worth it to pay extra for a few secs difference. I personally won't buy another WD again, my 5400 RPM WD drive makes more heat and noise than both my 7200 Maxtor and Seagate drives. Plus, it's the whinny high pitch noise that cuts in even while playing loud music.
 
C

CraigRT

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
31,440
5
0
Originally posted by: casper911
i have bad experiance with maxtor, i had 2 HDD fail in one year. the Maxtor manufaturing factory just few kilometers away from my house but they never alllow me to exchange directly but instead asking me to go the place where i bought the drive which is few hundred kilometers away.

and also they take weeks to reply mail and exchange the drive!
Click to expand...

I hate Maxtor now.... I had the same experience... crappy drives.
 
S

SandLizard

Member
Dec 11, 2002
165
0
0
i'd definitely suggest the WD 1200JB (or variant thereof), been quite happy with mine.

i've also been pleased with my IBM drive, but if I had to buy another, I'd go WD.
 
Jeff7

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
19
81
Originally posted by: Yield
Deathstar? who wants to own one of those... great job in the past with failure rate IBM! look what it does to consumers... u'll never see an IBM drive in my machine.
Click to expand...
Wasn't that only the 75GXP line? I have a 60GB 120GXP (think those letters are right; I know for sure it's 120 something) drive that has been working just fine for awhile now.

Out of the list you have there, CrazyClocker, the WD drive will be fastest - the 8MB cache really gives it a boost over the usual drive with 2MB.
 
G

gibbsman

Member
Jul 18, 2001
129
0
0
MAXTOR SUCKS!

I bought a Maxtor 8gb drive about 4 years ago, that POS drive has failed 6-7 times in the last 4 years. I can count on it going out about every 6 months. I thought it was getting overheated maybe so I took a box fan left the sides off my case and put a box fan on it blowing a hella lot air over the drive...needless to say it still failed in 6 months. Only good thing I can say for maxtor is that they have upgraded my drive about every 2 returns so now I am up to a 20gb, and they never ask question when trying to return it....probably cause they know the drives suck, so they take it back nicely.

My vote is with the Seagate or WD!

My 80gb Seagate barracuda is the quietest drive I have.
My 120GB WD Special Ed is noiser than the seagate, but very fast!
 
pillage2001

pillage2001

Lifer
Sep 18, 2000
14,038
1
81
Maxtor had come a long way since consuming Quantum. I would say that the Maxtor DM+ 9 is faster than the WD SE but don't quote me. I have both. If you wanna go with WD SE, better read up on the bearing issue. You'll not like it.
 
L

lorlabnew

Senior member
Feb 3, 2002
396
0
0
I'd definitely get Seagate (because the lowest noise) and reliability.
Had problems with couple of WDC's lately, and IBM's are too loud in read/write operations compared to other brands.

 
D

Davegod

Platinum Member
Nov 26, 2001
2,874
0
76
the seagate's slowness is exaggerated imo, it holds up much better with consistent transfer rates almost regardless of how full the disk is (compared to other hdd which drop off dramatically, so give more "optimal" results in benchmarks which are typcially done on fresh OS installs); plus it's a lot closer to the performance of the WD etc on small file transfers etc. For gaming if you want a quiet drive you're barely losing performance (in real terms) over the WD's, and theyre generally viewed as at least as, but probably even more reliable. Seagate the undisputed silence champion for reasonably performing drives. IMO it's a case of WD if you really want optimal performance & not too fussy about noise (theyre not terribly noisy); seagate if you want great performance with next to zero noise. After that only to consider reliability, warranty and price, which should be easy for you :)

edit: bah new keyboard time :/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom