PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Anyway, I'm not a game boy at all, I never play games, don't have the time for it... So I don't care about a game card. But I would like for it to be good covering all the needs of multimedia production. I'll keep reading... se you later...

I can't read anything bad about the ATI 9000, on the contrary, people say just wonders about it... ?:?:?:

Yeah, well, do you know personnaly somebody who has it? I don't know, this was my personnal experience.

I had the first generation of radeon, and exchanged it for and older matrox G450... Viewing DvD movie on matrox, was something else...

ATI wasn't sharp enough for my taste, and had plenty of dvd freeze during playback, artifact in sound when mouving mouse, etc...

Since then, i promised myself never again will buy stuff from a 'benchmark' perspective only. But quality of the image, driver, integration, stuff that comes with it.

Right, I follow you... For the job to be done, you guys have convinced me, so I'm going for the Mtrox P650!

The Baracuda 5 comes in 3 models!
1) SATA 8MB cache
2) PATA 8MB cache
3) PATA 2MB cache
(I don't think there is a 2MB SATA-model, but I may be wrong).

Acording to storagereview, the V is about 4-6dB less noisy than the IV (numbers from my memory).

For reviews on CD-ROM drives and burners, I recomend http://www.cdrlabs.com

I like my logitech mx300. It has a cord, but it is very light weigth - and extremely acurate.

I think you are heading at a very powerfull system

All right, I understand now… so there are three Barracudas… The PATA 8MBs seems to be the one for me.

Thanks very much for your help Immanuel.

And yes… it seems it will be a powerful system… I hope so!

I dropped by at Seagates homepage. I found it hard to see wich was the better drive ... 7200.7 or Baracuda V. So I send an email to thier support. Here is the answer I got



********************************************


Hello Immanuel,

The Barracuda V models are being replaced by the newer Barracuda 7200.7
series. They both have specifications on our website, but they made the
website where some are a little hard to find. We apologize for this
inconvenience, and will try to direct you to where the specifications are
located.

The main differences are that the internal transfer rate on the Barracuda
V models is up to 570 megabits/second, and on the Barracuda 7200.7 series,
it is up to 683 megabits/second. Another thing to look at is the average
seek time. It is 8.5 milliseconds on the Barracuda 7200.7 models, and 9.4
milliseconds on the Barracuda V. Other than that, the amount of platters
and heads, depending on the model, is less on the Barracuda 7200.7 family,
as they are putting up to 80 GB per platter on the 7200.7, and only up to
60 GB per platter on the Barracuda V models.

Some models are still transitioning to newer models, so they may or may
not be available through your dealer.

Most currently available ATA models are listed below:

Barracuda 7,200 RPM Ultra ATA 100
ST340016A - 40 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda IV model)
ST340014A - 40 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7 model)
ST360014A - 60 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7 model)
ST360021A - 60 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda IV model)
ST360015A - 60 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda V model)
ST380021A - 80 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda IV model)
ST380023A - 80 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda V model)
ST380011A - 80 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7 model)
ST380013A - 80 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7+ model)
ST3120022A - 120 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7 model)
ST3120023A - 120 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer ( Barracuda V model)
ST3120024A - 120 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda V model)
ST3120026A - 120 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7+ model)
ST3160021A - 160 GB capacity - 2 Megabyte buffer Barracuda 7200.7 model)
ST3160023A - 160 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7+ model)

5,400 RPM Ultra ATA 100 models
ST320014A - 20 GB capacity - 5,400 RPM - 2 MB buffer (U series X)
ST340015A - 40 GB capacity - 5,400 RPM - 2 MB buffer (Barracuda 5400.1
model)
ST360020A - 60 GB capacity - 5,400 RPM - 2 MB buffer (U series 6)

Barracuda 7,200 RPM Serial ATA models
ST380023AS - 80 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda V model)
ST380013AS - 80 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7 model)
ST3120023AS - 120 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda V model)
ST3120022AS - 120 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer ( Barracuda 7200.7
model)
ST3160023AS - 160 GB capacity - 8 Megabyte buffer (Barracuda 7200.7 model)

The Barracuda 7200.7 series data can be found at
http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/dis ... 81,00.html

The Barracuda V series data can be found at
http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/dis ... 61,00.html

By the way, the warranty is only one year on all of our ATA drives, and
Serial ATA drives, except for the Barracuda 7200.7+ series, which are
three years, not the 7200.7, which are still one year warranty.

Currently, the only Barracuda 7200.7+ series we are aware of being
available in the distribution channel are the ST3120026A, and the
ST3160023A.



Thad S.
Disc Presales



********************************************


A nice and informative answer - Maybe go for the 7200.7 then

Like the Barracuda also Maxtor's Diamondmax Plus 9 uses Fluid Dynamic Bearing. Seems to be even more quiet, not only according to PC Professional. The Diamondmax is really fast and ->stable. Maybe best choice at the moment.
Edit:
Burners: most boxes here are with a LG Combo. Sufficient for normal use (2-3 discs a week) and capable to run a DVD. Costs only 1 plug of 4. Audio 4x. My burner for daily use (I burn a lot!) is a Plextor. Audio done with 8x.
Instead of a CD drive I'd prefer a DVD. (Think about the Vienna Orchestra samples!)
Agree with Asus/Matrox choice. If you don't game this is definitely THE ONE.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Micha on 2003-05-09 05:58 ]</font>

Hey Immanuel, great information… I’ve tried to find specifications in Seagate page myself, but couldn’t really choose either. When I think I have decided the one I want to buy, there is a new one…

I’m asking myself why are they replacing those NEW drives so soon… they have just being released, as I understand. There is perhaps a problem with them? In any case, I imagine this makes the older even cheaper now, like the Barracuda IV, which is already a successful drive.

Hey Micha.
Are you referring to the ATA ones or to the SATA ones in the Maxtor series?

I have the Maxtor DiamondMax 9 w/8MB Cache, and it has the fluid dynamic bearings. It's a very nice drive. My previous IBM drives were much noiser (what with that infernal clicking noise it kept making, drive after drive after... anyway ) The Maxtor is really quiet and in so far as the benchmarks go (if you are willing to suppose that they are useful measurements of performance) gets way better performance. I have a couple of the Barracuda's at work, and they are not as fast as the Maxtor's (which I judge by how they respond to loading large files such as MPEG's and the like,into memory or when we move large files around) nor are they noticably more quiet.

It's hard to be entirely objective here because I do network and database management at work and audio at home, but I tend to move large files around at home too, on equivelent mobo's and processors.

I think the Seagate's were heralded in the audio community when they first came out, because they were a bit of an anomoly being so quiet, but they've not put out a competitive drive for almost a year now. They're not bad drives, but I think the WD Spec. ED. and Maxtor DMPlus w/8MB cache respectively are better hard drives, specifically for audio, as well as for general use.

On videocards, if you aren't going to play games then go Matrox. ATI is the best of the gaming cards, in terms of 2D/3D image quality (and now visual FX spendor and speed as well), but none of the gamer cards hold a candle to Matrox for image quality and crispness (the opposite, of course, being true for Matrox--they suck at making game cards). I use both a G450 at work, and a 32 MB Radeon AIW at home (before they started all this quad-digit madness) and both are displaying through the same ViewSonic A90f+ (my recommendation for CRTs BTW) so I feel I can provide an objective opinion on this one.

Anyway, hope that helps.

Sam

Sorry for the late response on this one...

No I don't think HD's are necessarily getting less reliable as much as I think they are being used more intensly than previously anticipated. While I'm sure the HD industry is tickled pink about a mass proliforation of home studios (which = $$$ 4 them) it puts them in a difficult position. If you're making consumer drives for people to write office memos, spreadsheets, play games etc., you can anticipate that computers will be shut down at night and the drives will only be used intensively for a couple of hours a day, if that. But now people are taxing their drives on all sorts of tasks, be it audio, filesharing, etc. Computers are left on overnight while they encode DivXs, burn DVD's from images (or conversely rip images from DVDs, or what have you.

Well typically, IDE drives weren't designed for such tasks. SCSI usually owned this domain for critical server use (and to a large extent still does, though it oscillates).

So now that consumer drives are taking up a greater load, manufacturers are trying to make the drives quieter, faster, longer living, etc. and use all sorts of new technology to do so. Well part of the whole IBM debacle was that they're drives were top rated when they first came out. And rightfully so, they performed exceedingly well. But how do you know how a drive with all sorts of heavily patented, new-fangled tech. will perform over the long term? Generally, you don't until it stops working and you've now got to drop $1500 to datamine your work off so you don't get fired. (or weep for days over lost takes)

Anyway, I've nothing against IBM, I use Notes/Domino and DB2 and love much that they do. It's just a fact that the data is and will always be more important than the hardware, and when it comes to HardDrives, you're living naively if you think a 3 year warranty is all you need to protect your data. (I mean to direct the last statement to the general populace and do not mean it in any accusational way... just to say that the only security for your data is multiple copies).

My $.02

Sam

On 2003-04-22 22:55, Nestor wrote:
Well, yes, this is a point! HDs of such size are difficult to back up anyway…

Are you saying HDs are becoming less reliable that they used to be?

Cheers.

Hi, I gone tru this topic, because I'm building a PC too. I'm going for almost same setup.
MB: Asus P4PE/L/G (lan and s-ata)
Case: (alu miditower with side-door fan-skyhawk)
PSU: Enermax Wisper serie 350w
CPU: P4 2,4
I'm waiting for the new Matrox-cards (650/750), so I'm gonna use my Matrox 450 for now.
And a new HD S-ATA.....see belove
Since I have 512MB RAM in my excisting DAW,
I think that's enough (at least for now).
CDRW and maybe HD's I might also take from
that pc. I do want a DVD burner, but has no hurry.
If i buy a HD now, i would buy the one below:

A test performed resently (in Norway)shows:
Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 9 S-ATA is the fastes HD they tested. It runs 10000rpm.
No heat or noise problems

good luck
arela, Noray

Heya Nestor,

Let me just run down my system-specs and you'll know what I mean by your on the right track:

p4 2.4 533fsb
1GB kingston pc 2700 DDRam (2-2-2-5 timings)
2*80 GB Seagate baracuda drives (silent and stable)
ASUS P4PE mobo
Matrox G550 dualhead card
Two sony 19" CRT screens
and of course my beloved pulsar+luna combo.

Everything is running great and stable.

Hope this helps

Thanks Dehuzar
I’m glad to hear there is somebody using the Maxtor DM Plus 9 8MB, most people here uses Seagate Barracuda. You can see it if you go to the systems specifications of Planet Z participants.

I have read probably about 40 reviews on both these drives, and the more I read, the more I divide myself into them… I don’t really know which one I should take… Of course I’m refereeing to the Seagate Barracuda V 7200 with 8MB and to the Maxtor you own. Perhaps the problem is that those recommending Seagate and those recommending Maxtor are both technically very convincing, and so I’m stack…

Don’t worry, you can’t offend me telling me the truth, on the contrary, I sincerely thanks you to blow away from my mind my childish believe in the guaranty period… whatever it may be in fact… I can’t but say you are right!

Cheers Arela for your answer
I think the price of those drives you are mentioning are rather high for what I have for the whole, the differences you can get are not as important nevertheless.

Hello Valium
It seems we are getting almost the same. Yes, I’m sure this is a good setup, I have studied it much, for long hours… and compatibility, reliability and fastness are guaranteed. My only concern know is about HDs, I’m a bit lost. But well, I have to take something and soon, everything have to be chosen in about 15 days, this is what I have left. Cheers...

to Nestor
Yes prices are high, and that's why i probably start off with my used HD's.
1.priority for me is to buy another LCD-monitor.
I'm using a very shimmering, old 17" as my 2. now

My personal experience with Maxtor:

Their partition tool is realy realy realy BAD

I had a Diamond max 8 in a PC, that I often reinstalled from scratch due to hardware testing. Maxtors tool just never gave me the partition sizes, I asked for! I would often end out with partitions of only 256MB. every time, I used the tool, it gave me a final overview with the settings I had choosen. But even though it claimed to have understood my settings, it repeatedly made up its own mind about what sizes my partitions should have. I tell you, it is realy annoying to have installed a full OS, and then look in the file manager and realize, that the work must be redone. Finaly I just always used fdisk!

I know, partition magic could have saved me time, but I do not want to spend money on it, and I don't use warez, so I did it the hard way always. Anyway, I know my win98 registration code by heart now

Well, of course you're right. But it's probably fair to say that all of the HD toolkits that they ship with HDs suck the proverbial hose. They're not designed to make your drive run well, they're designed to trick older legacy systems into believing that your bajillion GB hard drive is under the 8GB/30GB limit that many older systems whose BIOSes are no longer being updated suffer from. They usually make their own boot partition and add time to the boot process, and often cause your drive to not run in 32-bit mode. But there's nothing to say that you should USE that software. You can safely slap your drive in and use FDISK(Win95/98/ME) /Partition Magic/ DiskManagement(Win2K/XP)/ Whatever else you preference, and those will do the trick without adding and extra processes in the mix. Unless you are struggling to get full capacity of your drive, the only tools you should use that come with your HD are diagnostics tools, but most certainly do not use WD's, Maxtor's, Seagate's, whoever's HD tools. They'll ruin your performance. Period. And if you're trying to get a legacy system to recognize the larger drive, remember that it is in fact a workaround, no matter how much it may promise. If it's really that big of a deal, you're probably going to want to get a newer machine anyway. Besides, I've on several occasions, used other manufacurer's software on a competitor's drive and it works fine. You might also check out CNET and look for some free/shareware partition kits. But this is all to say that, the software might not be great, but you wouldn't want to use it for an audio machine anyway. The drive itself however, performs fairly well.

Sam

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dehuszar on 2003-05-11 16:54 ]</font>

I have an old IBM drive and 2 Seagate drives. I have used the supplied On-track software for all of them. If my PC boots slower due to this, it is not something I have ever noticed. I have run winXP on both the IBM and one of the Seagate drives. I believe winXP is pretty much only 32bit.

Are you talking from your own experiences or just quoting others? I have not experienced those problems. I don't say, that your Maxtor is a bad drive. I just say, that Maxtor supllies some pretty shitty software - from my own experience.

Reason not to like to use Fdisk: It takes so long, that if I gain one second boot time, It will still take me years to recover the time wasted with partitioning with this application (compared to using On-track).

I’m mainly concerned in the quality, reliability and quietness of the drives, rather than in their software. I don’t think I will use any software added to it, cos they are mainly a way to marketing the drive, just to offer something with it.

Well, I’m not still convinced of what to get as Hard Drives (the already mentioned Maxtor or the Seagate). If you think I have to buy Seagate, you have to convince me about drive performance and reliability.

For reliability ratings go to http://www.storagereview.com and register yourself. This gives you acces to a larger database (I think 15000+ harddrive entries), where people write down for each single drive, how long they have owned it, and if it still works. Once in a while (I just registered, so I don't know how often), you will get an email, that asks you to update the info, if anything has changed.

It is a realy nice feature. Noone is realy amking any money on it, but people help each other this way. Still, I wouldn't say, that you can judge reliability on a sub 1year old model. So if that is what matters to you (and if it realy worries you too), I think you should go check out the data on the Baracuda IV and the Maxtor 8.