Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Spinpoint F1: Samsung Overtakes With a Bang

Last response: in Storage
Share
November 21, 2007 10:15:29 AM

It arrived later than expected, but it is also better than expected. Check out Samsung's new hard drive family, the Spinpoint F1, which is poised to take the pole position. Is it fast enough to win?

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/21/samsung_overtakes_with_a_bang/index.html
November 21, 2007 11:31:32 AM

Impressive numbers especially considering it only uses a little more power than the WD uber-conservationist edition. Glad to see the classic hard drive industry (as opposed to SSD, which everyone knows is innovating much more quickly) isn't totally stagnant and that bit density is still going up.
November 22, 2007 2:03:24 PM

Nice drive. However, I wish there were acoustic comparisons. The drive's size/access rates aren't a factor to me so much as the noise level.
Related resources
November 22, 2007 4:50:17 PM

I assume throughput would be more important on a gaming rig as data tends to get loaded in chunks. Would this be correct?

Maybe Tom's can do a small article on choosing the best HD for specific uses? (Gaming, system drive, swap drive, media, etc) Or provide a little more detail on the comparison charts for what the #s mean for the avg user?

Cheers
November 22, 2007 7:18:55 PM

Tom's should implement dB measurements in their hard drive tests as well. HTPC users need large drives that are quiet.

I would still choose the WD GP however - it's quieter, uses less power, and the raid version is suitable to run a media center application 24/7. When you're using 6-12 drives, noise and power WILL get your attention.

This drive is FAST! Four of these in RAID0 should run circles around a four-drive RAID0 Raptor setup AND give you a beefy 4TB capacity.

WD needs a faster (and bigger) Raptor!!! :sol: 
November 22, 2007 7:56:20 PM

when are these coming out? im expecting to buy a new system in january with penryn
November 23, 2007 12:34:06 AM

Ooh! Impressive sequential transfers. The random access could use some improvement.

-mcg
November 23, 2007 11:55:44 PM

I am buying a new PC in January too and I am still wondering which hard-disk setup to take.

Maybe you can help me, I am leaning forward to either:

2x Raptor X 150GB (in raid 0) + 750 GB Samsung F1 32 MB Cache

or

2x Samsung F1 750 GB 32 MB Cache (in raid 0)

The first one is about 200 Euro more expensive than the second setup.

Is this 200 Euro well spend or are they about equity fast? My total budget is about 3000 - 3200 Euro and I use it mainly for games.

Thanks in advance!

PS: Is there any news on when the new Raptors will be released?
November 26, 2007 12:15:26 AM

Wait, so are they saying this Samsung T1 drive is Faster than the RAPTOR in every way - or just in a few ways?

I need a new system drive that will boot windows fast and start programs the fastest. I was going to get the Raptor X. Should i look into this drive?
November 26, 2007 12:58:20 AM

fishquail said:
Wait, so are they saying this Samsung T1 drive is Faster than the RAPTOR in every way - or just in a few ways?

I need a new system drive that will boot windows fast and start programs the fastest. I was going to get the Raptor X. Should i look into this drive?


Everything but access time and IOps. This has been happening with the most recent 7200rpm drives because of bit density.
November 26, 2007 1:17:57 PM

fishquail said:
Wait, so are they saying this Samsung T1 drive is Faster than the RAPTOR in every way - or just in a few ways?

I need a new system drive that will boot windows fast and start programs the fastest. I was going to get the Raptor X. Should i look into this drive?


You could get Samsung F1 2x 160GB in raid-0 to start up your OS, games and important programs.

And a Samsung F1 750GB 32MB Cache aside.

But the 160GB drives aren't available yet.
November 26, 2007 10:01:05 PM

yeah, why didn't they do dB and heat graph. BOO!!!

We care most about reliability, heat and sound, none of which this review touched on.

a b Ô Samsung
a b G Storage
November 26, 2007 11:39:37 PM

Waiting...

Waiting...

God Damn It!!! Still waiting...

[bashing head against wall]...

WHERE THE HELL IS IT? #@#%$@#$@!!!!!!!!!

<ouch!!>

Hurt my head... Loosing consciousness...

.
.
.

Damn, still waiting...
November 27, 2007 9:50:30 AM

Samsung has announced plans to go upscale with their hard drives.
Therefore the prices are rising as to what we enjoyed before.
Here in the USA this 1TB drive is $430 and NOT in stock.

The green Western Digitial is $249 with free shipping.
Its low power consumption is great for media servers. Go figure!

So I'd suggest we update our views of Samsung.
There marketing focus changed overnight and we should too.
Think Sony. :D 
November 27, 2007 12:13:51 PM

While it is exciting to see that 1TB drives quickly coming into existence, it does concern me that so much data is being stored on a single drive. Not only is there a lot to lose, but the idea of backing it up will be overwhelming for most.

On the data recovery side, this is going to impact the time and cost of getting the data back. It only took a few months from the rolling out of 500GB & 750GB drives before we started seeing them come through our doors. New does not mean more stable...in fact, I think it might be the other way around.

So, as I like to say, "be sure to have a good backup procedure and test it regularly."
November 27, 2007 9:48:56 PM

the 334GB platters should exceed the performance of raptors for its first few hundred GB. the F1s higher bit density has an advantage over the raptors 74GB platters.

if you have 2*334GB platters in raid 0 (such as with 2*1TB F1s), the bit density is still 'only' 334GB, not 668GB per platter, and so performance doesnt scale as such, even if the capacity has.

you could put them in raid 0, but that would seem to be a very bad idea, especially if you plan on putting much on it. it would seem more ideal to wait for smaller capacity hdds, with the same platter size, so data loss and backup doesnt become 'as much' of a concern... because 1TB of data is an awful lot to need to back up regularly.
a b G Storage
November 27, 2007 10:40:05 PM

Heh, I'm still using an old PATA 160Gb samsung spinpoint drive, single platter. Runs cool (freakily cool with only an 80mm intake fan cooling it to 20C or less on a hot day) and quiet.
November 27, 2007 11:01:02 PM

Randomizer,

I know you're smart, I've seen you around the forums for a while now. Please don't disappoint me with you statement. 20°C = 68ºF. Think about it, sub-ambient temperatures (unless you have an A/C PC or keep your thermostat at like 60°F). Oops. :kaola:  Sorry, this is not an attack, I just wanted to save you from yourself before the flames came.

Kyle
a b G Storage
November 27, 2007 11:54:52 PM

I know, I said "freakily cool" for a reason. Though it gets up around 30C with no fan. The SMART (how ironic) thermal sensor is probably not great.
November 28, 2007 2:22:14 AM

LOL. Q6600 +15° ... it seems like these problems are way too common, hopefully nVidia's ESA or whatever corrects the incorrect readings for so many components.
a b G Storage
November 28, 2007 2:59:22 AM

Yea. Or just say in large text next to the reading:

"100% chance this reading is bogus!"
November 30, 2007 11:01:36 PM

I hope that Tomshardware will test the other Samsung F1 drives that have the same high density platters. The 320GB (HD322HJ) and the 640GB (HD642JJ) drives might have the same read and write times as the 1000GB.

These drives although smaller might be what many system builders want, especially in a RAID array.
December 10, 2007 9:18:20 AM

Anybody try the Samsung F1 with a Areca SATA Raid controller, like the ARC-1220?
During boot the controller does not recognize the Samsung drives.

Anybody else tried this combo?
January 6, 2008 12:14:33 AM

I purchased the Samsung F1 1TB OEM model from Newegg for $280 USD. Using HUTIL from Samsung, it reports that the Maintenance Cylinder is bad. I've RMA'd and gotten a 2nd one with the same problem.

Multiple people have reported to have 2-3 drives with this issue. Nobody has reported having a passing HUTIL test yet. Anybody here have one that passes the Self Test (does not Erase data)?

I only ran HUTIL because my first drive had issues formating that would result in BSOD but once formated, it appeared to run fine. The 2nd drive formated normally without problems but also has the error in HUTIL.

I know that it is normal for HDDs to have some surface defects and these are normally reallocated to the Maintenance Cylinder. The question is, if this drive does not have one, or at least not a functional one, what happens? Does the cluster/sector get marked as bad, data moved, and you just lose space? Or are you liable to have the OS try to write on the bad sector(s) again?

I worry because this I do plan to fill the drive with at least 700 GB of data right off the bat. Samsung hasn't gotten back to me by email & their phone support knew absolutely nothing about the product or HDDs in general. At this point, I'm 98% positive if I RMA for a replacement, it will have the same problem with the M.C. So it's either let it slide or get a Seagate - though, even discounting the speed difference, on paper, I like everything about the Samsung better.

Both drives report Reads of 90-96 MB/sec in HDTach 3.0.4.0 in both Short & Long Test though in case anybody was wondering.
January 22, 2008 1:47:25 AM

When this review first came out I was all ready to buy the 1 TB Samsung. But now seeing all the many problems posted by users at Newegg has me scared. I wish the author of the article would comment on the errors that are being reported when users run Samsung's own software utility. Was this same utility run on the test sample? Thanks.
February 17, 2008 2:42:42 AM

I agree with X-ray Doc -- I was all set to buy a 1TB Samsung. I need a big, fast drive for backups, but the user reports at NewEgg set off major alarms. I can't trust a potentially unreliable drive for such an important task. (It has occurred to me that unsavory competitors could have bought a few Samsung drives and deliberately loaded the "reviews" with negative comments, but there's no way to prove that, given the small amount of feedback posted on this new series of drives.)

Does anyone here have a feel for the overall longterm reliability of Samsung drives? Are they really as bad as people on the NewEgg site make them out to be?

I am a small reseller, and have built a couple of hundred systems in the past. I have had occasional problems with WD, Seagate and Maxtor drives, but the WD drives have been most reliable overall. Unfortunately, WD Corp. is now pushing its GP (Green Power) drives, which offer reduced performance. WDC no longer publishes the spin speed of those new models. I called their tech support this morning, and even they didn't know how fast their GP drives turn.

Thanks to the performance comparisons published here, it seems the GP drives must be running at about 5400 rpm. So, WD drives are off the table for my current need. Of the three brands I have used, the Maxtors have given me the most problems, so it looks like my best choice will be a Seagate 1TB 7200.11 series.
a b G Storage
February 17, 2008 8:54:27 AM

KyleSTL said:
Everything but access time and IOps. This has been happening with the most recent 7200rpm drives because of bit density.


I think this is also due to the fact that the Raptors are still SATAI 150MB/s and the others are SATAII 300MB/s. But its nice to know that my simple Seagate Barracuda is faster than a Raptor. I guess the extra money may not be worth the extra access time.

I would like to see them compare these drives to the same drives in a RAID0 and see if it scales well with multiple drives. Not all do. Some tend to give less than 2x performance but I guess we will never know huh?
a b G Storage
February 17, 2008 9:00:19 AM

Boudin said:
I agree with X-ray Doc -- I was all set to buy a 1TB Samsung. I need a big, fast drive for backups, but the user reports at NewEgg set off major alarms. I can't trust a potentially unreliable drive for such an important task. (It has occurred to me that unsavory competitors could have bought a few Samsung drives and deliberately loaded the "reviews" with negative comments, but there's no way to prove that, given the small amount of feedback posted on this new series of drives.)

Does anyone here have a feel for the overall longterm reliability of Samsung drives? Are they really as bad as people on the NewEgg site make them out to be?

I am a small reseller, and have built a couple of hundred systems in the past. I have had occasional problems with WD, Seagate and Maxtor drives, but the WD drives have been most reliable overall. Unfortunately, WD Corp. is now pushing its GP (Green Power) drives, which offer reduced performance. WDC no longer publishes the spin speed of those new models. I called their tech support this morning, and even they didn't know how fast their GP drives turn.

Thanks to the performance comparisons published here, it seems the GP drives must be running at about 5400 rpm. So, WD drives are off the table for my current need. Of the three brands I have used, the Maxtors have given me the most problems, so it looks like my best choice will be a Seagate 1TB 7200.11 series.


I would recommen Seagate. But I think Maxtor will not be as bad as they were to you seeing as how they are now owned by Seagate.

My experience with Seagate and WD has been different than you. I still have 2 120GB Seagate Baracudda SATAI in RAID0 and they are 5 years old. The only WD I had didn't like its nice little PC home and decided to lose all my data. Either way Seagate has great stuff and I guess WD does as well.

My only question is what happened to Seagates Cheeta drives? The ones that ran at 15kRPMs? Anyone else remember them?
May 25, 2008 9:29:03 AM

I would really like to see the follow up with more mainstream capacities promised in the conclusion. It seems there can be a significant performance difference between different capacity drives of the same series.

There appear to be almost no reviews and/or comparisons of 7200.11 and SE16 in 500 and 750 or 640 for that matter, surely there are more users interested in these capacities than 1 TB.
!