Overclock.net banner

41 - 53 of 53 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by MaddenModer
View Post

Really? I RMAed my Seagate 3TB and its warranty got carried over..

Well they completely boned me on my 2 1.5TB drives. Maybe they only do that when they have lots of failures... Terrible company that screwed me out of $300 worth of drives that were supposed to be under warranty still..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
How do I get to the screen to purchase a UPS shipping label from Western Digital?

I want to do an advanced shipment and get a shipping label from them (since it looks cheaper).
 

·
Master of Black Snow
Joined
·
19,338 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReciever View Post

I've had 4 drives from them fail on me, almost cried everytime lol. WD for since then and no issues thus far and Hitachi too, since they are one in the same now I believe

sent from my EVO 3D
Hitachi is now owned by WD yes but it's gonna take awhile for the WD made drives to completely trickle round the market. Hitachi took a lot of crap after Seagate bad mouthed their drives. Drives fail yeah, but Seagate mouthed off in order to get some of their market share. I own 1 TB Deskstars and they've not once had a problem, they're quiet and do what Hitachi claimed they'd do. My mother also has Hitachi drives in her system, my brother has one, I have friends that I've bought Hitachi drives for too. Not a single failure. Doesn't mean it won't happen but it's highly unlikely at this point. I've been running my first drive for a couple years now, my 2nd nearly as long. At this point if there were only 3 drives available(WD Hitachi and Seagate) and you put a gun to my head to force me to buy a Seagate, I wouldn't think twice and would tell you to just get it over with and pull the trigger. Seagates have a worse failure rating than the companies they consistently bad mouthed.
mellowsmiley.gif


~Ceadder
smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,903 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceadderman View Post

Hitachi is now owned by WD yes but it's gonna take awhile for the WD made drives to completely trickle round the market. Hitachi took a lot of crap after Seagate bad mouthed their drives. Drives fail yeah, but Seagate mouthed off in order to get some of their market share. I own 1 TB Deskstars and they've not once had a problem, they're quiet and do what Hitachi claimed they'd do. My mother also has Hitachi drives in her system, my brother has one, I have friends that I've bought Hitachi drives for too. Not a single failure. Doesn't mean it won't happen but it's highly unlikely at this point. I've been running my first drive for a couple years now, my 2nd nearly as long. At this point if there were only 3 drives available(WD Hitachi and Seagate) and you put a gun to my head to force me to buy a Seagate, I wouldn't think twice and would tell you to just get it over with and pull the trigger. Seagates have a worse failure rating than the companies they consistently bad mouthed.
mellowsmiley.gif

~Ceadder
smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
I agree. Hitachi got a lot of bad rap after their "Deathstar" drives, and their reputation among enthusiasts has never really recovered. But looking at the reviews, and from my own experience with their drives, they are quite solid performers nowadays, and reliable. And it sounds to me like Seagate is starting to slide on the quality side, but I don't have any personal experience with any of their drives, so I can't really say.
rolleyes.gif


At any rate, I was pretty stoked when Hitachi announced their 1TB platters, as soon as their out for a reasonable price, it'll be the next hard drive I buy!
thumb.gif
 

·
Iconoclast
Joined
·
30,976 Posts
Hitachi never had "Deathstars"; that was IBM.

Also, the deathstars were a problem with one model of drive (the 75GXP) that never influenced any other IBM Deskstars or any of the drives Hitachi ever made.

During Hitachi's run, the Deskstars had some of the lowest failure rates of any consumer drives, and tended to have consistently good price vs. performance vs. capacity.
 

·
Master of Black Snow
Joined
·
19,338 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

Hitachi never had "Deathstars"; that was IBM.

Also, the deathstars were a problem with one model of drive (the 75GXP) that never influenced any other IBM Deskstars or any of the drives Hitachi ever made.

During Hitachi's run, the Deskstars had some of the lowest failure rates of any consumer drives, and tended to have consistently good price vs. performance vs. capacity.
Actually the term Deathstar was coined about the Hitachi Deskstar drives after some idiot Seagate Rep bad mouthed their 1 TB 5 platter drives. His claim was that 4 platters are better than 5 which is absolute rubbish because that's more information per platter for the reader to sort through. Where 5 platters has less information stored on them and the information is closer to the edge of each platter. His agenda was clear the moment he flapped his gums about the whole issue. I won't listen to Reps. Those are the last people to be listening to because it's their job to advertise and sell product to the industry.

~Ceadder
smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,525 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceadderman View Post

Actually the term Deathstar was coined about the Hitachi Deskstar drives after some idiot Seagate Rep bad mouthed their 1 TB 5 platter drives. His claim was that 4 platters are better than 5 which is absolute rubbish because that's more information per platter for the reader to sort through. Where 5 platters has less information stored on them and the information is closer to the edge of each platter. His agenda was clear the moment he flapped his gums about the whole issue. I won't listen to Reps. Those are the last people to be listening to because it's their job to advertise and sell product to the industry.
A 5x200GB platter drive will have lower sequential speeds than a 4x250GB platter drive. The only time this would not be true is if the 5 platter drive were using 250GB platters, and "short-stroked" itself in the firmware. (In which case, why add the extra platter? It just raises the cost and introduces reliability issues.) Velociraptors do that, though - they use a portion of 1-2 2.5" platters.

Most 5 platter drives have reliability issues. Certainly all of Seagate's 5 platter drives did... and all of WD's 4 platter drives did. The first WD 2TB Blacks and the first WD 2TB Greens did have issues - but all of my 3-platter 2TB Greens are still going strong, so that seems to be the sweet spot.
thumb.gif
1-3 platters seems to be best. Beyond that, your odds of mechanical failure go up too much. A single platter drive is definitely the most reliable, so long as they don't skimp in other areas. I wonder how long those single-platter single-side 320GB Samsung F4's are going to last?
smile.gif


Anyway, sequential speeds are mainly determined by platter density. (And also what the head/controller are capable of.) As density increases, it does get harder to lock onto a track - that's why the highest densities are usually used for Green drives, and the next highest densities are reserved for high end 7200RPM drives. One company (Hitachi) does like to use super high densities on all their drives - that's why most of theirs have max sequential speeds in the 150-200MB/sec range, but also have 16-17ms access times to match. (even on their 7200RPM drives) Western Digital on the other hand prefers to cap sequential performance. You get much less jaggy HDTune graphs on most WD drives. Some (like the 5400RPM WD20EARX) get close to 15ms access times, which is superior to Hitachi's 7200RPM drives. (except the sequential performance caps out at 120MB/sec - far far lower)

Anyway, that's enough rambling for today.
tongue.gif
 

·
Master of Black Snow
Joined
·
19,338 Posts
I get what you're sayin kramy but that guy's agenda was clear. He was dogging a perfectly serviceable drive for one reason and that was to sell drives for his company at the expense of potential market loss to a competitor.

Now we have Seagate at it again claiming shenanigans on WD and an "ex Seagate" employee. WD lost the initial case but they say they're gonna fight it because the accusation is baseless. Seagate is doing this to block the buy out of Hitachi. IMHO, this is nothing more than underhanded tactics to protect their ability to pick up a competitor at the expense of another competitor who already agreed in principle to sell to WD.

I forget whether it was billion or million but the award was just an insane amount that if WD caved could literally stop their acquisition of Hitachi. I think it was $525 million awarded on an allegation. I think Seagate attended the same dirty pool seminar that Intel and NVidia did. Can't play on a level playing field? No worries, accuse/defame/ & deflect.
mellowsmiley.gif


~Ceadder
smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
you should link this to the fools at Seagate. Needles to say I won't be buying seagates anymore.. 2 drives crap out on me already.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,525 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceadderman View Post

I get what you're sayin kramy but that guy's agenda was clear. He was dogging a perfectly serviceable drive for one reason and that was to sell drives for his company at the expense of potential market loss to a competitor.

Now we have Seagate at it again claiming shenanigans on WD and an "ex Seagate" employee. WD lost the initial case but they say they're gonna fight it because the accusation is baseless. Seagate is doing this to block the buy out of Hitachi. IMHO, this is nothing more than underhanded tactics to protect their ability to pick up a competitor at the expense of another competitor who already agreed in principle to sell to WD.
Oh, I agree. The company uses dirty marketing tactics. I remember watching the Momentus XT video. It drew completely wrong conclusions. It pitted the XT against an old Raptor (not the newest fastest models), and they kept saying the XT was faster at every benchmark.

But that was absolutely wrong. The Momentus XT booted faster, and then after that the Raptor and XT completed every benchmark in a compareable amount of time. That leads me to the conclusion that the XT is probably slower than the newest Velociraptors in all tasks, since they chose a model that was at least 40% slower than the 600GB ones...

And in that case, what good is it other than for faster booting? When they launched the drives a 500GB Momentus XT was priced at a staggering $159.99... and had stutter/spinup issues, and it took them a year to tweak the caching properly...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceadderman View Post

I forget whether it was billion or million but the award was just an insane amount that if WD caved could literally stop their acquisition of Hitachi. I think it was $525 million awarded on an allegation. I think Seagate attended the same dirty pool seminar that Intel and NVidia did. Can't play on a level playing field? No worries, accuse/defame/ & deflect.
mellowsmiley.gif


~Ceadder
smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
Well, I agree with you there. Those companies do have long histories of that stuff. Intel's is probably the longest, and then it's a tossup on who takes second place.
 
41 - 53 of 53 Posts
Top