PDA

View Full Version : Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000 Terabyte Hard Drive Review


Rebeccak
05-18-2007, 10:33 AM
Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000 Terabyte Hard Drive Review

Link (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2131552,00.asp)

We're pretty impressed with the overall performance of the Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000. However, as we pack more data onto these compact digital devices, the thought of losing that data is a bit daunting. Losing 160GB of data is one thing, but losing 900GB of your digital life is quite another. If you do opt for one of these massive drives, a good backup strategy is essential. If you're concerned about reliability, two drives set up in a RAID 1 configuration may give you a little peace of mind, but RAID 1 is no substitute for a good backup.

The price for the 7K1000 is impressive: $399 (MSRP) for a one terabyte drive. That price is pretty close to what we've seen on the web, with some web shops selling as low as $389, while others are charging as much as $599. As supply increases, pricing will likely shake out.

almux
05-20-2007, 06:32 PM
I seriously consider to put 2 of these inside the Mac Pro. The first To will be the 2nd Disk for works (the 1rst is the basic 250 Go startup disk for apps and side jobs) and i plane to make Time Machine run the backup search on the 3rd (2nd 1To drive). I rather will use the second To drive for a "real" backup and not just an automaticly updated miror disk.
On what i've been explained, Time Machine will manage this way of working.

CaptainBarbosa
05-20-2007, 11:08 PM
It's not truly a 1 TB drive though, the claim is assuming that a TB is 1,000 GB rather than 1,024. You're really getting about 932 GB on that drive, they're gypping you out of 92 Gigs of storage!

mech7
05-20-2007, 11:35 PM
It's not truly a 1 TB drive though, the claim is assuming that a TB is 1,000 GB rather than 1,024. You're really getting about 932 GB on that drive, they're gypping you out of 92 Gigs of storage!

They should really do something about that i mean when it was a few mb ok... but now 92 GB cheated :(

Pin_pal
05-21-2007, 12:28 PM
Might just have to slap two of these in my Tivo. MMmmmm 2000 hours recording time.. :D

UrbanFuturistic
05-21-2007, 01:11 PM
Actually, it'll be 1,000,000,000,000 bytes exactly, but that does round off at about 931Gig. However, seeing as all drive manufacturers are guilty of this and have been for years it's hardly time to be calling them on this :p

nuclearfessel
05-21-2007, 02:59 PM
And its one noisy drive too.

Even so, Hitachi needs five platters and ten heads to hit 1TB. Having that many heads can have an impact on issues like noise and power draw. For example, the 750GB version of the drive is rated at 30dB while seeking; the 1TB sibling generates 32dB.

amannin
05-21-2007, 09:18 PM
if you have a steel case the sound wont be so loud -- but yah, i'm not sure i'd want that much information on one harddrive --- but then again I'm already using a 500gb, which would devastate me should something terrible happen to it :argh:

Matt
05-27-2007, 04:18 AM
I buy only external drives anymore.

It just makes sense.

EASY redundant backup with no central connection, wherein a classic file server setup, one zap from a bad PSU can kill everything.

The MyBook 500GB drives are a good investment. The only complaint is you can't specify when they go to sleep. (I'm unsure about the 'pro' versions or the 'pro 2') So if you're really into a good Painter session and you're not an obsessive compulsive saver, be prepared to wait for it to spin up now and then.

It's cool to see drives are finally getting to 1TB though, instead of faking it through two RAIDed drives.

I wonder if solid state drives will ever catch up? It'd be nice to have a 1TB flash drive, especially if it was lightning fast.

Gimme that and a 1THz CPU please. :)

Waboflex
05-28-2007, 03:32 PM
It's not truly a 1 TB drive though, the claim is assuming that a TB is 1,000 GB rather than 1,024. You're really getting about 932 GB on that drive, they're gypping you out of 92 Gigs of storage!

Aha, this old chestnut again. I used to think the same until I did some reading about it, and it turns out the drive manufacturers have been right all along, and it's everybody else that's wrong :)

As I'm sure you all know, the scientific notation prefix 'Kilo' means 1000, whereas the computing world has taken 'Kilobyte' to mean 1024 bytes. This isn't technically correct, since 1024 has its' own proper prefix of 'Kibi', i.e. it should have been Kibibytes, not Kilobytes. Likewise a Gigabyte = 1000^3 bytes in reality, while a Gibibyte = 1024^3 bytes, and I think the binary version of Tera is Tibi. So when you buy a Gigabyte drive, you're getting what it says on the box, but when you buy a Gigabyte of memory, you're actually getting a little bit extra for free, i.e. a Gibibyte. Half-full, not half empty...

It's a bit of a nomenclature mess though, and unfortunately I think it might be a bit too late to change the commonly accepted usage now. Still, when drives are getting this huge, it doesn't really make that much difference, does it? That's what I like about hard drives, they don't get any cheaper, they just get bigger :)

CGTalk Moderation
05-28-2007, 03:32 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.