What is the best brand of HD?

[jessiem25]

I am currently looking to replace my HD. I'm not sure what kind it is, but it is only a 12.7. I've got an Athlon 500 Mhz cpu, and Win. 98se, but the new HD would have Win 2K.

What is the best, most reliable brand? Seagate, Western Digital, Maxtor? All of the prices seem to be in the same range, so that doesn't help. I'm looking to get an 80Gb, 7200rpm, but not sure if I should get a 100 or 133 speed. Does a 100 motherboard still use a 133 drive? Thanks for your help!

 

[cdogg]

My 2 cents:

A 20GB Maxtor that I still own constantly gets bad sectors, though I didn't have this problem with any other Maxtors I've come across. Never had a problem with any Seagate drives. Can't say much for Western Digital since I've never owned/maintained one.

I would go with one of the IBM deskstars (60GXP or 120GXP) or any Seagate Barracuda.

 

[CitrixEngineer]

I think hard disks are pretty much equal these days, but people certainly have preferences!

My favourites are Maxtors - I've got several, and none have died, including a pair of ancient 500Mb SCSI disks I have in an old server.

I've also got 4 or 5 WD drives, and about as many Quantums which are still working as good as new.

In my experience, Maxtors seem to give best performance for the price - and the Diamond Max drives are very quiet.

I've got one Seagate and one Fujitsu, and never had problems with either - but they're not the quickest drives I've used ;-) At one place I worked at, I noticed Seagate IDE drives failing more often than other types, although it has to be said that their SCSI drives are superb. Tomshardwareguide rates the new Barracuda very highly.

Definitely get an ATA133 7,200RPM drive. Even though your current motherboard will treat it as ATA100, you will likely as not get a board in the future that will support ATA133 (or beyond!). The few extra £/$ will prove worthwhile in that future time. 7,200 RPM drives generally are very fast. Look out for one with a large cache - I think the newer Maxtors have 4Mb, although I read of a WD 120Gb drive with 8Mb

http://www6.tomshardware.com/storage/02q1/020305/index.html.

Note this article is old (March!), and comments that most "current" boards do not support ATA133. There is also a useful set of comparative benchmarks at

http://www6.tomshardware.com/storage/01q3/010905/index.html

Tomshardware is always a good place to browse when considering a new hardware purchase (but remember to post at Tek-Tips for "real-world" experiences ;-))

I hope this helps CitrixEngineer@yahoo.co.uk

 

[gavrc]

I agree with cdogg, IBM make beautiful HDDs but you do pay for the priviledge. From my retail experience in the past Fujitsu's were slow and had the highest fail rate, Seagate were also slow as CitrixEngineer has pointed out. I think we can all agree Maxtor give top rate performance at a more reasonable price than IBM.
Always go 7,200 and get the biggest and fastest (ATA) you can afford. It will stand you best in the long term.

Gav
A problem with your PC??? Never...

 

[ANFPS26]

I have a Maxtor 10GB that has been running trouble free for four years. Knock on wood! Jakespeare has said in this forum that he uses nothing but Maxtor and IBM with no problems. By the way does anybody know what has happened to Jakespeare? He hasn't been in this forum since April 3rd. "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing....."

 

[edfair]

In the drives I've used:
WD seem to fail more often
Quantum and Seagate seem to have about the same failure rate
Maxtors are hard to characterize some models are failure prone and others are relative troublefree
IBMs that I've been involved with have disappointed me
Fujitsu (mostly SCSI) have been frustrating. Ed Fair
unixstuff@juno.com
Any advice I give is my best judgement based on my interpretation of the facts you supply. Help increase my knowledge by providing some feedback, good or bad, on any advice I have given.

 

[cdogg]

Wow Ed! Tell us the good news! LOL

 

[jexster]

I usually get western digital but sea gate is usually cheaper.

 

[gavrc]

Go Ed my man!! Do you still use tape drives?
Gav
A problem with your PC??? Never...

 

[edfair]

Look , computer service guys have a different view of good. And it changes after a hard day of trying to get some drives to work.
Like printer repair guys have favorite ribbons.
Yeah, Wangtek 5525s when I can get them. At least for the SCSI Unix stuff I support. Zip 100 for my personal stuff across the network and external zip 100 for those locations needing transfer in or out. People that set up machines without separating OS, Programs, and Data will regret it some day.

The good news: Murphy was an optimist.
The bad news: Your hard drive is going to fail.
The worse news: You won't be prepared.

Hard drives are basically generic. SCSI is better.
Buy a drive, don't worry about the maker. Be prepared for failure.
MTBF is a figment of the designer's imagination. Ed Fair
unixstuff@juno.com
Any advice I give is my best judgement based on my interpretation of the facts you supply. Help increase my knowledge by providing some feedback, good or bad, on any advice I have given.

 

[sbrust]

Ed,
what do you mean separate the os from the programs etc....?

 

[CitrixEngineer]

It's a good practice to install the Operating system on one partition, applications on another, and data on a 3rd. If you can do this on different disks, then you have even better protection (naturally!).

Although Ed's comments are a little on the pessimistic side, I have to agree on the whole. Eventually, all hard disks fail because they are mechanical. When they will fail is entirely unpredictable, and no drive manufacturer can build in a guaranteed life.

I don't agree that SCSI are better, on the whole. I've dug more dead disks out of servers than I care to remember. Especially older Seagates. Of course, this may not be a fair comparison, since servers hit disks far harder than desktops.

In my comments I merely noted my observations - some manufacturers appear to be more reliable than others. But, of course, this could have been down to the disks themselves.

*There are lies, damned lies and Statistics*

On a more optimistic note, I still think that Maxtor represent a good buy, since all of my own Maxtor disks are still working, and I've never had to throw one out at any of the client sites I've worked at. I'd be interested to know which models appear to be prone to failure.

CitrixEngineer@yahoo.co.uk

 

[edfair]

I like to think more realistic. Primarily because I spend most of my time pulling people out of self dug pits.

And realize that my observations about drive failures are 2 to 3 years out of date, since I'm not seeing them at installation, but at the failure point in time. Plus , I'm on the trailing edge of the technology, not at the bleeding edge like most people posting here.

If you are serious about computing and use them professionally, backup is a concern. And backup is easier with segregated data. And since a good computer user who is concerned with being protected from worst case disaster will have a minimum of 2 backups, maybe 3, then not having to backup a whole system 3 times is a significant savings in time and effort. But there are tradeoffs, which will get covered in my next stand on the soapbox.
Thanks, CE Ed Fair
unixstuff@juno.com
Any advice I give is my best judgement based on my interpretation of the facts you supply. Help increase my knowledge by providing some feedback, good or bad, on any advice I have given.