Benchmark Results: Power Consumption
Idle power has decreased considerably between generations. On one hand, there certainly is technological progress on the spindle motor. On the other hand, decreased platter count (five to three to two) contributes most of the savings.
Power required at maximum throughput has decreased by 50% from the original drive to the 7K1000.B. However, the latest drive requires more power for this type of workload.
With HD video playback, the data stream doesn’t cause a lot of stress to the drive. The difference from the oldest to the newest drive is a bit more than 40 percent. This result wouldn't necessarily apply to other drive vendors, since Hitachi is the only one shipping five-platter desktop drives. Thus the difference across three product generations would more likely be between 20% and 30% for other manufacturers.
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.