Hitachi's 500GB SATA-II Reviewed
Doggie Fizzle writes "The specifications for the Hitachi Desktstar 7K500 are impressive. 500 GB of disk space, 16 MB of cache memory, and 3.0 Gbps of transfer speeds are about as good as you are going to get in today's hard drives. The only category that might be rivaled is transfer speed, but that would require RAID or an Ultra320 SCSI drive to do so. This BigBruin review matches it up with some Seagate drives to show off its performance."
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those streaming naked and petrified Natalie Portman!
I think I speak for everyone on Slashdot with a brain when I say please stop submitting stories. Thanks.
I read this several days ago !
Are there any news on this planet ?
Please stop posting these blatent advertisements, I was recently given a free tester of this product, and even though they usually send testers products that are BETTER than the ones in retail to get higher marks, this one didn't perform ANYWHERE close to the specifications.
Stephanie Klugg
www.hardwaregirl.com
"7K500" ? are you trying to be annoying? plus what is the point of RPM except in helping with other stats like seek time and transfer speed? or do you just like your hard drives to make high-pitched tinitus-inducing whirs for the sake of it?
Friggin Troll let me tell you r a story about NCQ better yet let me not...
Now die in a hole... or under a bridge or something.
NCQ does decrease latency I have a Seagate drive that supports it. Alot of drives do not support NCQ though. I fail to see how I am a troll.
Okay, I'll bite, what do you mean by lower latency drives?
I looked it up on m-w, and this is what I got for Latency(noun):
Are you telling us about some psychosexual development phase you are stuck in?
I think the original post is an idiot, trying to sneak a word in that has nothing to do with hard drives. If he means dormant by latency, then what is he saying, that what slows down a hard drive is when it is not being used?
If I was upgrading a system, and wanted speed, the two things I would do first (considering the computer has a modern CPU), the two things I would do first is max out the ram and add a second hard drive and mirror it with the first.
It is about bottlenecks. The 16meg cache is the only impressive thing about the featured hard drive. Personally, what I will wiat for is the same 16 meg cache on a 200 gig hard drive, it will probably cost 1/4th the price of this one.
The only reason I would want a 500 gig hard drive is for storage, and that would not be the hard drive I would mirror or keep the OS on. If I had a choice, I would rather get 2 SCSI 15,000RPM 15gig hard drives mirrored for the OS, and then a third storage drive. That is if speed is critical.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
yes. let's all fuck the jews.