Comparison Table And Conclusion
| Manufacturer | Hitachi | Hitachi | Hitachi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Deskstar 7K1000 | Deskstar 7K1000.B | Deskstar 7K1000.C |
| Model Number | HDS722020ALA330 | HDT721010SLA360 | HDS721010CLA332 |
| Form Factor | 3.5" | 3.5" | 3.5" |
| Capacity | 1,000GB | 1,000GB | 1,000GB |
| Spindle Speed | 7,200 RPM | 7,200 RPM | 7,200 RPM |
| Other Capacities | 750GB | 160, 250, 320, 500, 640, 750GB | 160, 250, 320, 500, 640, 750GB |
| Platters | 5 | 3 | 2 |
| Cache | 32MB | 16MB | 32MB |
| NCQ | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Interface | SATA 3 Gb/s | SATA 3 Gb/s | SATA 3 Gb/s |
| Operating Temperature | 5-60°C | 0-60°C | 0-60°C |
| Specified Idle Power | 8.4W | 5.2W | 4.4W |
| Measured Idle Power | 8.7W | 6.2W | 4.6W |
| Operating Shock (2 ms, read) | 70 G | 70 G | 70 G |
| Warranty | 3 years | 3 years | 3 years |
Conclusion

A few results in this analysis were surprising. The fact that idle noise doesn’t have to be lower if there are fewer rotating platters is interesting. So is the fact that PCMark Vantage show application performance not necessarily increasing just because of much higher throughput. The Deskstar 7K1000.C is a very efficient and fast hard drive that beats the older 7K1000.B and initial 7K1000 in most tests. However, the C doesn't necessarily outperform competitors from Samsung, Seagate, and WD. Please check our updated Desktop Hard Drive Charts for more details and comparisons.
In general, the Deskstar 7K1000.C provides improved throughput, lower power consumption, and better efficiency than its predecessors; this is not necessarily surprising and is, in fact, expected. Given the incremental results here, though, we see the compromises that Hitachi accepted when designing its hard drive. A low platter count may drop costs, but it's not always favorable from a performance standpoint. While throughput increases, access times typically suffer a bit. This may also have an impact on application benchmarks, such as PCMark Vantage, in which there are a few test runs the 7K1000.C doesn’t win.
In the end, it seems that the segmentation of the hard drive market does make sense, as it is increasingly difficult for a hard drive manufacturer to deliver a silver bullet. Performance and efficiency remain very important, but none of the current hard drives manages to dominate in all aspects. Hitachi’s latest Deskstar 7K1000.C delivers timely performance and high efficiency for the mainstream. No more, no less.
Latest Internal Storage News
Latest Internal Storage reviews
- 16/05 – Intel SSD 330 Review: 60, 120, And 180 GB Models Benchmarked
- 11/05 – Do-It-Yourself: Upgrading Apple's 27" iMac With An SSD
- 01/05 – Marvell-Based SSDs From Corsair, Crucial, OCZ, And Plextor:...
- 26/04 – Best SSDs For The Money: April 2012
- 25/04 – Hitachi's 4 TB Hard Drives Take On The 3 TB Competition
good test. its well to know that speed rise up with generations
"All mainstream Hitachi drives, however, originate from a different product line that has so far been limited to 1TB. Unbelievably for many enthusiasts, most 3.5” hard drives sold today are still below this capacity point"
Why would I want a 1TB drive on a workstation? The whole idea of a corporate network is that everything gets stored on the... NETWORK. The last thing I want to do is provide 1TB of worthless space per desktop. 80 /160GB is more than enough for what the workstation needs to store - O/S and apps ONLY.
" 80 /160GB is more than enough for what the workstation needs to store - O/S and apps ONLY.
Totaly Agree, I've just brought a new 500GB drive... to replace.. MY BOOT DRIVE!?! it's far to much, im wondering how to partition it. 150GB for boot drive, then the rest for the app's i guess... really overkill off space for a boot drive. I have all my files on Raid networked drives.
I've had 500Gb for my boot drive for ages. Since I moved all my files onto a RAID 0 array (which turned out to be pointless but oh well), all I've got left is a 32Gb Windows partition on a 500Gb drive. I loaded Ubuntu into another 10Gb of it, but the rest has just sat not being used.
If large primary drives were needed, then SSDs would not be catching on as quickly as they are.
I've had 500Gb for my boot drive for ages. Since I moved all my files onto a RAID 0 array (which turned out to be pointless but oh well), all I've got left is a 32Gb Windows partition on a 500Gb drive. I loaded Ubuntu into another 10Gb of it, but the rest has just sat not being used.
If large primary drives were needed, then SSDs would not be catching on as quickly as they are.