60gb 120gxp or 60gb Barracuda IV?

[evilhom3r]

Hi everyone, well I just found out that my 60gxp is indeed dead and that I have to buy a new one (no warranty...*******s at z-buy.com). Should i go with the 60gb 120gxp or the 60gb Barracuda IV?

Seagate Barracuda IV 60gb-$89 from www.newegg.com
IBM 120gxp 60gb- $80 from www.newegg.com

also, would i have to buy a hdd cooler if i'd go for either of these models? Thanks for the help.

[Cooler666]

get the 120GXP its faster and also cheaper than the seagate. Also these drives are reliable unlike IBM's previous series.

[nikhsub1]

I would go for the Maxtor's, I know they aren't on your list but they are fast AND reliable. Not quite as fast as the 120GXP's but it should last longer. BTW, the WD's with the 8MB cache are the fastest ATA drives out right now.

[WideMouth40]

Tough choice there, but the new series of IBM drives rock. Take a look at this recent shoot-out between WD, IBM, and Maxtor.

http://www.overclockers.com.au/techstuff/a_hdd_shootout/

Peace

[evilhom3r]

i've heard stuff about the IBMs getting really hot and not being able to use them for over 8-11 hours on any given day? Is this true. If so, how much would getting a hdd cooler help considering that my room gets hot in the summer

[FTC]

evilhom3r,


As you can see in my sig, I am running a 120GXP... and constantly watching its temp (yes, they have a thermal sensor). The fact is, it is running always at 30-32 degrees C (ambient here is 23C), and when busy, never more than 35. With the Feature Tool diskette, there is a functionality to stress and try to get max temp from the drive... I have not been able to get it running hotter than 38... so, definetly, 120GXPs are colder than 60's and 75's.

Now, for the 333 hours/month, do a bit or web surfing and you will see that this is in fact a *communication* misunderstanding. This is why I think 120GXPs rock (and in fact bought one of those).

Regards
FTC

[ThePerfectCore]

*FTC's computer mysteriously explodes in flames*

evilhom3r, check out these two links.

http://www.tech-report.com/news_reply.x/3035/0/

and

http://www.tech-report.com/news_reply.x/2799/.

Have fun. :D

[FTC]

ThePerfectCore,


Yes, had read the claim before... but have to tell you 2 things :

1) Do not belive all you read in the net.... use some criteria.

2) Even if you belive something, put it in context.

What I am talking about ? Let's see... in your links, it *seems* like there are tons and tons of problems with the 120GXP IBM drives. Count them... Now substract all the 'dubious ones' (the ones that are quite probably software errors or user errors, not drive errors. Now substract all that are related to 75GXPs and 60GXPs (we are talking about 120GXPs, right?)... Now substract all cases of *drive mishandling* that are not told... of course you will have to guess this,... and now compare this to the amount of drives sold... (you will have to guess again)... is this data above or under the *mean* for prime line hdd manufacturers *normal* RMAs ????.

Now, a second 'statistical' result : Go to google, and do some simple searches (make/model DIED/RMA words) :

Searching for IBM GXP DIED/RMA .... returns 169/311 hits
(Note that this includes 75GXPs and 60GXPs)
Searching for QUANTUM FIREBALL DIED/RMA... returns 1260/459 hits
Searching for WD CAVIAR DIED/RMA... returns 388/330 hits
Searching for SEAGATE BARRACUDA DIED/RMA... returns 389/464 hits

..... and so on

I know, I know, it is very difficult to *extrapolate* valid conclusions from these numbers (and hits), but *statistical* data is, for big numbers, many times better than clearly biased data.

So, you will not convince me 120GXPs are not good just by those two links (even if my drive fails today). In fact, and by the way, I belive that the data I have stored in my 120GXP is probably safer than the data I have in my Quantum Fireball... Oh!, I just noticed you also have a Quantum Fireball!.... Well, let's cross our fingers anyways........



Regards
FTC

[The Coolest]

I'm not sure about new IBMs, but I do know that my Quantum Fireball 10GB, is a very good, drive, I never had a crash yet, I almost fried it once, I smelled it burning and it still works and no bad blocks or anything... this drive is about 2.5 years old. The only thing I hate about it, is its noise levels.. but I guess it was tipical for any drive of its age..
I'm pretty sure that my data is safe. although I don't have anything that is important and not stored on a CD ;)...
Generaly all HDDs are good when properly treated and handled. but the old WDs upto 15GB dunno about anything newer suck.. all the drives I had from 850MB to 8.4 GB and heared about many more cases of dead HDDs in a really short time. I've got 2 WDs in my second system cause I've got no money to buy a new HDD.
they are 4.3 and 2.5 they are both half dead and the 2.5 has 500MB of bad blocks and isn't bootable at all.

[Cooler666]

Originally posted by FTC
ThePerfectCore,

1) Do not belive all you read in the net.... use some criteria.

so don't believe me or him either

Originally posted by FTC
What I am talking about ?

good question :D

Originally posted by FTC
Now, a second 'statistical' result : Go to google, and do some simple searches (make/model DIED/RMA words) :

Searching for IBM GXP DIED/RMA .... returns 169/311 hits
(Note that this includes 75GXPs and 60GXPs)

Searching for QUANTUM FIREBALL DIED/RMA... returns 1260/459 hits
Searching for WD CAVIAR DIED/RMA... returns 388/330 hits
Searching for SEAGATE BARRACUDA DIED/RMA... returns 389/464 hits

..... and so on

I know, I know, it is very difficult to *extrapolate* valid conclusions from these numbers (and hits), but *statistical* data is, for big numbers, many times better than clearly biased data.

this argument is completely dumb either way. You can't do searches on google and from that estimate which one dies more, consider how many reviews you get as well as RMA's, and also sites corresponding to sellers and to nothing.

Originally posted by FTC
So, you will not convince me 120GXPs are not good just by those two links (even if my drive fails today). In fact, and by the way, I belive that the data I have stored in my 120GXP is probably safer than the data I have in my Quantum Fireball... Oh!, I just noticed you also have a Quantum Fireball!.... Well, let's cross our fingers anyways........

Agreed, Quantum were by far the best when they existed, now IBM are the best.

[FTC]

Cooler666,


I agree with you in most everything... (specially in : "now IBM are the best" ;) ). Of course I do not post in forums to convince people, but so that they know my opinion.... and can , using their own criteria, form their own opinion.

Regarding the 'statistical' approach of my post, of course I agree this is not a serious study... I was posting it just to show how easy it is to make data look like one wants to, and one form being putting together all complaints against a given disk manufacturer, as can be read in the referred post's link. BUT, beware, IF numbers were high enough AND it could be PROVEN that there is no conspiracy going on against one or other manufacturer, (i.e that the sample is independent) even with all the 'noise' you mentioned, in those 'dumb' google searches, it could probably be proven that there is some truth in the obtained results. The idea behind is ... the noise affects them all the same, so the big variances the number of obtained hits could have some correlation with drives quality. Of course, too many IFs to take this numbers seriously.


Regards
FTC

[Raiden]

You DO know that the WD 800JB-SE's just were released in 80GB capasity? That is what I would recommend. Very nice ATA drives that are nearly as good as a SCSI!

[evilhom3r]

unfrotunately, I'm cheap and broke, my mom was nice enough to offer to buy this drive for me up to 90 bucks. Also, i have to pay for the other 12 gig that died with this 60gig drive, ugh this comp has been nothing but trouble. I've used it for exactly 3 weeks since I built it in november.

[evilhom3r]

also, I havn't heard anything bad about the 'cuda's which is why I'm considering them. It's just that I've seen so many people complain about various manufactureres while Seagate just seems to have few problems besides heat (decent hdd cooler should take care of that though...). Thanks for the input by the way, it's been very helpful.

[The Coolest]

Yea, betwin the two choices that u have, go w/ barracuda...

[WideMouth40]

If you are considering going with a RAID set-up, stay away from the Seagates. They don't get along with Raid controllers and end up being slower in Raid than when used normally.

Peace

[Cooler666]

I wouldn't even consider Seagates, I would consider IBM 120GXP vs Maxtor

[evilhom3r]

seems to be that I'm getting two IBM 60gxps for next to nothing (don't ask). Are the failure rates on those anywhere near as high as the 75gxps? Also, It'll just be off whenever I'm not using it b/c of the noise the comp generates. Last, by 11hrs a day do they mean on for 11 hours a day or being used (ie: data crunching) for 11 hours a day?

[BioS]

Cooler666

As i saw you list 120GXP 80G, just wonder do you experient any clock up on over limit use?

evilhom3r

Getting 2 60GXP? I rather get 1 on 80G 120GXP. They're cheap as 99 bucks shipped on PriceWatch.com. So far, the 333hrs/M failure rate on 120 GXP series are lower than another. I'll get my 80G this weekend

[Cooler666]

no clock up. The 33hour thing is just IBM trying to cover their asses against lawsuits, you will not experience problems running it 24/7

[OldGuy]

Originally posted by WideMouth40
If you are considering going with a RAID set-up, stay away from the Seagates. They don't get along with Raid controllers and end up being slower in Raid than when used normally.

Peace
In another thread on this page you can educate yourself on the facts about the Cuda IV and RAID.
http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=89597

The only thing I know about IBM drives is that I had three GXP60's in the last 18 months and they all died. That's all I'll ever know about IBM drives. If they were the last HD manufacturer on earth I would walk away from computers.

[Cooler666]

Well the 60GXP series sucked, those problems are gone now.
If you want RAID stay clear of seagate

[OldGuy]

Originally posted by Cooler666
If you want RAID stay clear of seagate
Did ya read the link I posted?

[evilhom3r]

sorry, not planning to o/c or do raid if it helps.

[rhombus]

I was going to simular 120gpx post but found this one.

I was thinking about either a 80 gig WD or the IBM 80 gig 120GPX from newegg.com
But i am undecided.

As far as falure rates go, the first drive i bought was a WD caviar 2.5gig ($230 to tell you the time frame) but died a month after the warranty ended.
So i replaced it with a WD 10.1 gig. from my main comp and got a 75GXP 30gig. for it.
Still useing both drives today running 24/7 no probs.
But now i need a drive for my third comp. and going to do the hand me down thing again.

My birthday is in a week and I need to decide FAST!

I was just wondering what everone's falure rate was, which brand ,and if they run their systems 24/7 like mine?

[Sonny]

Seagates HDD work with RAID now. Firmware upgrade was all it took according to them. If you want a HDD to be stable, keep your data safe & last then go with Seagate if y

[evilhom3r]

well, it's decided. I'm getting a 60gb 60gxp for 30 dollars (yes, 30 because a friend of mine is buying it through her school's vendor) and then a smaller older ibm 20gig

[evilhom3r]

Originally posted by Cooler666
no clock up. The 33hour thing is just IBM trying to cover their asses against lawsuits, you will not experience problems running it 24/7
clock up? Basically, i just want to know if it's ok to leave my comp on all day if it's not doing any data crunching (not planning on running seti or folding on an IBM HDD, i might be cheap but i'm not dumb.)