# Fastest regular hard drive



## Homeless (Nov 18, 2008)

I was wondering what the fastest regular drive on the market is now.  By regular, I mean non-ssd / raptor / scsi.  Size doesn't matter since I'm just going to throw the drives in raid0


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Nov 18, 2008)

samsung f1s or 640 wdd or 7200.11 seagates ...


----------



## farlex85 (Nov 18, 2008)

Any drive w/ a 333gb/platter density will be among the fastest, like the ones IRA mentioned (only certain models of the F1s, such as the 1TB, and 7200.11s have this).


----------



## Pinchy (Nov 18, 2008)

Depends on size.

If your going for something like 1TB drives, you will need (as farlex mentioned) 333GB plattered drives.

For "size doenst matter", get some *single platter* 320GB drives (eg, newer revisioned WD SE16's).


----------



## Squirrely (Nov 18, 2008)

WD's 3200AAKS and 6400AAKS (320gb per platter) are quite speedy drives. The 320gb has super low power consumption, and it is neat silent. But, they are only 320gb per platter if it is the B3 revision. If you buy from Newegg or similar though, chances are it is a B3 revision drive.


----------



## Homeless (Nov 18, 2008)

i'll look into the WD 320 gigs, thanks


----------



## Homeless (Nov 19, 2008)

actually does anyone know where i can find benchmarks for the 7200.11 vs wd?


----------



## cdawall (Nov 20, 2008)

get the seagates over the WD they run cooler and quieter


----------



## spearman914 (Nov 20, 2008)

Spinpoint F1s


----------



## nafets (Nov 20, 2008)

Two Samsung F1 320GB (HD322HJ) or 640GB (HD642JJ) HDDs would rip through most anything in RAID0...

They are both very quiet and cool also.


----------



## DrPepper (Nov 20, 2008)

Samsung F1's ... very very very fast


----------



## Homeless (Nov 20, 2008)

After reading a bunch of reviews about the 320 gig wd / seagate / samsung, I've determined that the seagate is supposed to be the fastest, but has an extremely high failure rate on only the 320gb model.  I'm most likely gonna go with the HD322HJ unless someone can convince me otherwise.


----------



## DrunkenMafia (Nov 20, 2008)

WD 6400AAKS.  I have 2 of em in raid and they are really good.  Silent as a snowflake.

  Good luck with the new build


----------



## Silverel (Nov 20, 2008)

F1's are best for real-world apps and gaming. Seagates for benching, WD for.. err, reliability? I've yet to have on fail I guess...


----------



## Hayder_Master (Nov 20, 2008)

samsung f1 with 32m cash


----------



## PuMA (Nov 20, 2008)

samsung f1 640gb. very fast and silent


----------



## Pinchy (Nov 20, 2008)

I own both the WD SE16 and Samsung F1. 

The WD's are definately faster *BUT* I have the 640GB F1's (dual platter) whilst the SE16's are single platter 320GB drives.


----------



## exodusprime1337 (Nov 20, 2008)

i say go with 320Gb 7200.11 baracuda's from seagate, i got two in my rig in raid zero and get an average read of about 180Mb/s or so


----------



## Mussels (Nov 20, 2008)

Silverel said:


> WD for.. err, reliability? I've yet to have on fail I guess...



i've had four of them fail. I really reccomend the samsung F1 of those options.

Fastest mechanical hard drive is the WD velociraptor, fastest HDD period is intels SLC SSD drive.


----------



## Widjaja (Nov 20, 2008)

Comes down to the luck of the draw oon which brand is better for the consumer.
All my HDDs I have owned are WD and I have never had a problem with any of them.
My borhter on the other hand has had nothing but trouble with them.


----------



## kaskuli (Nov 20, 2008)

WD Caviar Black.  Has a nice ring to it and it will look good in your sig.


----------



## Zehnsucht (Nov 20, 2008)

I'm curious to why you excluded the Velociraptor. 
Since you're not interested in size, the other factors are noise and performance.
You do know that the Velociraptor is the fastest mechanical non-SCSI drive?
You do know that the Velociraptor is the most silent 3.5" mechanical harddrive? (well, actually the HDD itself is 2.5", but you get my point)
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article29-page2.html


----------



## kaskuli (Nov 20, 2008)

Cost per MB/GB, even though this criterion was not specified...



> I was wondering what the fastest *regular* drive on the market is now. By regular, I mean non-ssd / *raptor* / scsi. Size doesn't matter since I'm just going to throw the drives in raid0


----------



## Zehnsucht (Nov 20, 2008)

kaskuli said:


> Cost per MB/GB, even though this criterion was not specified...



Yes, I read the first post. But the only criteria stated was speed and that size didn't matter. 

The *raptor* != *velociraptor* since it's leaps in performance, power consumption and noise.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 20, 2008)

this has a comparo between the regular raptor 36GB's and a seagate 320GB

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=76670


----------



## DOM (Nov 20, 2008)

SAMSUNG Spinpoint F1 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache 

8mb test







32mb test


----------



## Homeless (Nov 20, 2008)

I apparently did forget to say that I was also looking for the cheapest solution, so that's my fault.  I'm most likely going to get 3 of the 320gig F1's and throw them in raid.  Only $171 shipped (before cashback) from NCIX


----------



## Mussels (Nov 20, 2008)

Homeless said:


> I apparently did forget to say that I was also looking for the cheapest solution, so that's my fault.  I'm most likely going to get 3 of the 320gig F1's and throw them in raid.  Only $171 shipped (before cashback) from NCIX



well that will certainly be fast.


----------



## orionbg (Nov 20, 2008)

Hello All
PLEASE STOP Recomending the Samsung drives! I work at the RMA Department of our company and we build PCs. We have so much troubles with Samsumg drives! They are crap!
Here are some numders for proof:

07.2008 mounted drives: ~2000   returned: ~1200
08.2008 mounted drives: ~2500   returned: ~1000
09.2008 mounted drives: ~1700   returned: ~900
10.2008 mounted drives: ~2800   returned: ~1300

And most of them woun't even last for a month! We tipicaly give 2 years of warrany on owr systems and not verry long ago I personally changed an HDD from a system for the 5th time! Yes they are fast but If you really don't want to lose your data don't use Samsung HDDs! Particulary the 160GB and 320GB series! Even the 500GB Series have very high failure rates!


----------



## DOM (Nov 20, 2008)

orionbg said:


> Hello All
> PLEASE STOP Recomending the Samsung drives! I work at the RMA Department of our company and we build PCs. We have so much troubles with Samsumg drives! They are crap!
> Here are some numders for proof:
> 
> ...


SAMSUNG SpinPoint P Series 160GB 7200 RPM 8MB Cache for 2yrs and still works never had a problem might be ur company


----------



## Mussels (Nov 20, 2008)

orionbg said:


> Hello All
> PLEASE STOP Recomending the Samsung drives! I work at the RMA Department of our company and we build PCs. We have so much troubles with Samsumg drives! They are crap!
> Here are some numders for proof:
> 
> ...



well in contradiction (although a far, far smaller sample than yours) i've had 4 (of 5) WD 6400AAKS drives die on me, and 0 samsung 500/750GB drives out of about 20.


I thank you for your advice... its just that your info seems to go against what most of us have personally experienced. please dont take it personally if it takes some of us time to believe you.


----------



## orionbg (Nov 20, 2008)

This is mine experience! I'm just sharing it with you. We get the drives from the main distributor for Samsung in the country. They have there full waranty afcourse but it is really irritayting to change HDDs on a daily basis! Maybe Eastern Europe is getting low quality shipments I don't know!?

Excuse my bad English!


----------



## PuMA (Nov 20, 2008)

I´ve tested both WD AAKS and samsung F1 640gb´s. WD gave me 14.5ms access time and F1 13.5ms. Both were non-raid setups.


----------



## Asylum (Nov 20, 2008)

Go with the 7200.11 Seagates...I have 2 and there fast enough and never had any problems with them!!


----------



## Homeless (Nov 20, 2008)

Asylum said:


> Go with the 7200.11 Seagates...I have 2 and there fast enough and never had any problems with them!!



The 7200.11 320gb hard drives apparently have a 50% failure rate or something extraordinary like that.  The larger versions aren't effected to my knowledge, but those are out of my price range.

As for the Samsung comment, I have heard of some failures, but the majority of the people with them seem to be happy, therefore I don't know what to say


----------



## Asylum (Nov 20, 2008)

I have the 250's there very reliable!!


----------



## theeldest (Nov 20, 2008)

Earlier I recommended the 640GB AAKS.

Not sure if it helps anyone, but I've decided to update my system with the WD 320GB AAKS. I like how my 3x 640 AAKS drives run (silent, cool & fast).

The only negative I've really seen with them so far (excluding people's personal failure experiences which don't mean anything because the small sample size makes it statistically insignificant) is that you can't guarantee you'll get the 1 platter model.

(unless someone knows how to do this?)


----------



## Widjaja (Nov 20, 2008)

This time I paid attention to what the OP really wants, which is a regular fast HDD.

Personally to me a regular HDD is 320GB, although here in TPU it's a general minimum.
The WD 3200AAKS is a fast HDD so I recommend it.

Just remembered at work the regular HDDs I have problems with are the seagate barracudas when doing a rebuild on a customers PC.
The regular Samsungs I have come across seem to be rather noisy.

But this only out of my own experience.
Good luck with whatever HDD you choose.
Just remeber you can get duds in any brand.


----------

