A magical seagate 80gb 7200.8 IDE?

[nd4spdbh2]

OK well i just reinstalled windows on my HTPC and i had bought a 7200.8 80gb ide drive for it a while back and i had never benchmarked it cus well i never saw the necessity. Well today i decided ehh why now just see how the hd does... and i was so taken aback by the results of the 4 long hd tachs i did ( i thought something was messed up) that i went and did an HDTUNE test... did i recieve something magical or what. i have NEVER seen a NON perpendicular recording 7200rpm hd do. And it by no means has the highest disk density.... the Hitachi 7KT250 series has the highest of non perpindicular 7200rpm hds.

I mean

63.2MB/s average sequential from a 7200.8 80gb ide.... thats almost what a single one of my7200.10 Perp sata2 250's does.

Check attachments for numbers.

[tuskenraider]

Definately one of the best in STR of the 7200.8 drives I've seen. Mine averages 51.7MB/s, seeks are 15.1ms.

[nd4spdbh2]

Definately one of the best in STR of the 7200.8 drives I've seen. Mine averages 51.7MB/s, seeks are 15.1ms.

ya thats what i am saying... i have NEVER seen a 7200.8 or any other non perp 7200rpm drive do these types os STR's

[emboss]

That's actually a 7200.9, not a 7200.8 (search seagate.com for the model number ST3802110A). However, the 7200.9's are usually slower than the 7200.8's so why is your drive faster? It's all about the platters ...

The ST3802110 uses a (single side of a) single 160 GB platter, which is why it's so fast. Most of the other drives in the line use 125 GB or 100 GB platters. The only other one in the 7200.9 line to use the 160 GB platter is the 160 GB drive IIRC. Anandtech compared the 500 GB model to the 160 GB model - HDTach results are at
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2682&p=5

[nd4spdbh2]

oooop yup ur right it is a 7200.9 80gb 2mb chache IDE... but i dont understand why i am gettin results that are only 2mb/s away from my 250gb Perpindicular.... i thought the perps had quite a bit more data density than any other drive out there.

[freakdiablo]

and thats why im a seagate fan :) I would do the same with my 7200.7 rpm 80gb but my desktop is messed up and I have it in a usb enclosure. tested it a while back and only getting 20mb/s, actually 5mb/s LESS then my 4200rpm ibm travelstar laptop hdd, probably to the whole usb bottleneck thing on ext. drives. (these were on the everest ultimate tests)

[emboss]

Most 7200.10's only have 188 GB platters, so your drive is pretty close with its 160 GB platter - assuming a similar zoning pattern the 7200.10's STR would only be 8.4% higher. This more or less agrees with the results you've got, as it would put the 7200.10's at 68.5, which isn't far off what some sites have been getting. For example, see the second-to-bottom post at
http://forums.storagereview.net/index.php?showtopic=22660&st=25
(68.4 MB/sec average for those who can't be bothered following the link :) ).

In theory, you will also lose a litle bit of STR performance as you only have one head (a cylinder switch is slower than a head switch) - a 160 GB 7200.9 drive would be marginally faster, though probably barely measurablely.

edit: Apostrophe fixup

[nd4spdbh2]

Most 7200.10's only have 188 GB platters, so your drive is pretty close with its 160 GB platter - assuming a similar zoning pattern the 7200.10's STR would only be 8.4% higher. This more or less agrees with the results you've got, as it would put the 7200.10's at 68.5, which isn't far off what some sites have been getting. For example, see the second-to-bottom post at
http://forums.storagereview.net/index.php?showtopic=22660&st=25
(68.4 MB/sec average for those who can't be bothered following the link :) ).

In theory, you will also lose a litle bit of STR performance as you only have one head (a cylinder switch is slower than a head switch) - a 160 GB 7200.9 drive would be marginally faster, though probably barely measurablely.

edit: Apostrophe fixup

hmm weird i coulda sworn that the new perpindiculars had ALOT higher density than even their 7200.10 non perp counterparts let alone a 7200.9

[RJARRRPCGP]

Disappointingly, the Seagate perpendicular HDDs seem to be roughly the same as my non-perpendicular Maxtor HDDs. Maxtor has one of the best performing non-perpendicular HDDs, too. (even before Seagate acquired Maxtor, AFAIK.)