need new hard drive fast!!! help me pick one!!

theMonster

Disabled

Joined

Jul 22, 2004

Location

At the pub

• Nov 3, 2004

• #1

My HD flatlined last night and is on life support right now. I'm reinstalling XP on a 25GB Maxtor 5400RPM HD to try to retrieve all my important crap off of my 40GB 7200RPM WD Caviar.

Here's my choices and I'm open to more, not wanting to spend much though.

Samsung 120GB 7200RPM 8MB ATA133 $80
WD 80GB 7200RPM 8MB ATA100 $60

Those are the two leading candidates. I wanted a Raptor, but it looks like those are all SATA which I don't have. Is there really a big difference between ATA100 and ATA133?????

 

hibner

Member

​

Joined

Dec 5, 2003

Location

Huntington, WV

• Nov 3, 2004

• #2

I have the western digital, no problems with it. If it is the 8mb cache Caviar Edition it runs at ATA133.

 

d94

$30 a phone

​

Joined

Sep 26, 2004

Location

48302

• Nov 3, 2004

• #3

go w/the samsung
its a good brand + more storage for the money (space:money ratio)

 

FireFox

Member

​

Joined

Sep 22, 2004

Location

SLO, CA

• Nov 3, 2004

• #4

Since I havnt heard anything for a while about Samsung reliability, I would stay away from the Samsung personally. The had a reputation of dieing when you really needed them.

Of course it has been a while so their QC could be much better now.

My suggestion would still be to go with the WD 80GB. Be safe!

Foxy

 

OP

theMonster

Disabled

Joined

Jul 22, 2004

Location

At the pub

• Nov 3, 2004

• Thread Starter
• #5

I'm leaning the WD way now......I'll be ordering it tomorrow and trying to recover my crap tonight. I read that ATA100 vs 133 is no big deal. I've had a couple of WD drives go bad on me, but they've lasted for 4-5 years or more. This drive just gave NO warning. Is it correct that the Raptors are SATA only??

 

OP

theMonster

Disabled

Joined

Jul 22, 2004

Location

At the pub

• Nov 3, 2004

• Thread Starter
• #6

Forget the Raptor. Looks like it'll be the WD unless more people vote against it.

 

David

Forums Super Moderator

​

Joined

Feb 20, 2001

• Nov 3, 2004

• #7

ATA133 doesnt offer any benefit, really. The Samsung drives have been fine for me - I have the 120GB/8MB cache/7200rpm/SATA model and its been fantastic.

 

jcw122

Member

​

Joined

Jun 25, 2004

• Nov 3, 2004

• #8

i vote WD...dont like Samsung...they make too many different products...makes them feel kinda generic

 

OP

theMonster

Disabled

Joined

Jul 22, 2004

Location

At the pub

• Nov 3, 2004

• Thread Starter
• #9

WD order placed!! Now, hopefully I can recover my photos and tax forms. I'll know in a couple of hours

 

Keiron

Member

​

Joined

Jul 1, 2004

Location

New Haven, CT

• Nov 3, 2004

• #10

If it doesn't work, try booting the system with Slax live (or the other HD) and throwing the HD in a zip-lock bag and into the freezer for about an hour. That will finish off the HD, but it might work for 30min-1 hour, giving you ample time to back your stuff up. I was able to do that with my 2nd failed HD.

 

D

depthad

Member

​

Joined

Jan 28, 2004

• Nov 3, 2004

• #11

i vote you spend 9.99 more and buy the seagate 120gb 8mb cache with 5 year warrentee from newegg.co and we can go on this adventure together also, the seagate has faster access times and is tested to be notably more quite both load and idle. just my .02 cents
+'s:
faster access times
2 years more years warrentee
notabley more quite

 

OP

theMonster

Disabled

Joined

Jul 22, 2004

Location

At the pub

• Nov 4, 2004

• Thread Starter
• #12

That drive was actually $20 more. My 40GB seems to be working now that I've reformatted it, but I'm not going to trust it. It'll now become the slave and the new 80GB Western Digital will become the master. The old WD 40GB 7200RPM was 2MB cache and the new one is 8mb, so hopefully it'll be noticably faster.

 

austinbmxnig

Member

​

Joined

Jul 3, 2004

Location

Austin

• Nov 4, 2004

• #13

i would trust WD way more than samsung for storage

 

thor17usa

Member

​

Joined

May 1, 2004

Location

GA

• Nov 11, 2004

• #14

depthad said:

i vote you spend 9.99 more and buy the seagate 120gb 8mb cache with 5 year warrentee from newegg.co and we can go on this adventure together also, the seagate has faster access times and is tested to be notably more quite both load and idle. just my .02 cents
+'s:
faster access times
2 years more years warrentee
notabley more quite

Click to expand...

I have to agree with depthad on the Seagate. I might be a little more but I have never had a Seagate die on me for any reason and plus they did just start the 5 yr warrenty program on all their drive which in the past was a luzary only to the SCSI owners. If you have already placed the order then that is fine, but if you decide you need more storage soon, so with a Seagate.