Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Seagate vs. Seagate 7200.12

Last response: in Storage
Share
October 23, 2009 6:25:54 AM

Hi all

I am thinking of buying a 1TB HDD. I am using WD caviar Green 1TB right now, which I am finding kinda slow for my purposes.

So my question is " Out of these three HDDs which is the fastest: WD Black, Seagate 7200.12 and WD Blue" (all in 1TB flavor).

Also, is 7200.12 any better in terms of reliability? I know there were issues with the .11 series. Has seagate removed those yet?

I have been and still continue to read the reviews but, I could not find one about the reliability part.

More about : seagate seagate 7200

October 23, 2009 6:45:11 AM

I am sorry I meant WD vs. seagate 7200.12 in the title.

How do I edit the title?????????????
m
0
l

Best solution

October 23, 2009 8:08:57 AM

Hi, :sol: 

WD is more reliable than Seagate, but currently the fastest 1TB HDD drive comes from Seagate. The 7200.12 serie have 2 disks 4 heads. The density is equal to 2TB drives nearly. (Not the same in fact, 2TB goes lower to inner circles by the head arms) :ouch: 

WD 1TB drives have 3 disks 6 heads. (Like Seagate 7200.11 serie) the density is bigger. 333MB on per platter now. But Seagate's 7200.11 drives inner electronics somehow faster than the newer serie. The test sites therefore can not agree which one is really faster. WD meanwhile a bit slower than those two but not much. It has 2 actuators from top plate and down by the motor spindle. :sarcastic: 

Let me explain this, Seagate drives are really bad starting from 7200.10 serie. 7200.10 serie decreases to 1 percent life expectancy in 2 months of running times in some badly ventilated cases. This means you can say goodbye to your new drive in 3 months if you run your PC 16 hours a day! :pt1cable: 

Some utilities like HDD Life Pro, Hard Drive Inspector, DEKSI Hard Drive Manager, Atrise FBI, ActiveSMART etc. gives very good info about the Hard Drives. They can display total run on hours, life percentage left, health related Smart Event status etc. :love: 

If you are thinking to make a Raid 0 set. NEVER, think about Seagate drives. (Unless they are Enterprise class, I haven't tested them, but tested WDC ones. My 4x WDC 250GB Raid 0 ones were really fine and still goes above %95 with very good health status after 2 years) But I have JB class ones too. The white covered ones also, still %95 and over, but the black covered ones (the older serie with same capacity) %80+ health left. :heink: 

WDC goes better and better day after day by means of dependancy, but Seagate drives just goes to the opposite way. Therefore be very careful when selecting a new HDD, if you do not want your everything goes above the clouds unexpectedly fast!

Bye... :hello: 

Share
Related resources
October 23, 2009 8:31:59 AM

***..............

Thanks for the insight karakarga. Man, see this is the exact problem when it comes to the HDD. You just cant rely on the reviews. Biggest question when somebody buys an HDD is reliability, which no review can predict. Thats what forums are for and hence my question.

Actually seagate .12 is available at less than green's price here in India. And they are faster than black according to many reviews. Only question left was for reliability. I am still not sure if seagate has ironed out the kinks found in their .11 series or not.

Anyways, other people on the same forum are recommending seagate .12 on DIY threads. So I will just hang in here and wait for other people to reply (not taht I doubt you, in fact you were wonderful in your reply.). Thank you.....
m
0
l
a b G Storage
October 23, 2009 2:24:49 PM

I run a raid 5 set 24-7 with Seagate .11 drives for a year now and have not had one problem with them (this is on my everything machine).
m
0
l
October 25, 2009 3:38:27 PM

first of if u ever want to get hold of Seagate u most likely wont be able to, lol there impossible to get a hold of (there numbers dont work and they dont reply to emails and faxes lol, but the Seagate hdd 12 series that i got from ebuyer had nothing but problems with on vista, it would take a full night to install and the crash at completing stage, and was really slow when i did finally get it to install.
work ok with xp but u need a floppy disk drive to install sata on xp (unless u use native ide) not had any problems with win7 tho and u dont need drives win7 recognised it as sata as with no probem (with me it did tho)
m
0
l
!