The JB is not currently available at the store I Want to buy from (sold out). Am I really losing much performance by going with the BB edition? the BB is cheaper by a small margin and is available right now so thats why i am considering getting it instead. Any major reason why i should wait?
WD800JB vs WD800BB
- Thread starter bjon045
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Computers Hard Drives
HammerBot
Distinguished
- Jun 27, 2002
- 1,342
- 0
- 19,290
Try another store 
. If you really need the drive now, the BB version is a good alternative. There is some debate about how much performance is gained by the larger cache. There is an advantage but it is not large. I cant put any numbers on this since I havent got a BB version to benchmark.
<i><b>Engineering is the fine art of making what you want from things you can get</b></i>
<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=655" target="_new">My systems</A>
. If you really need the drive now, the BB version is a good alternative. There is some debate about how much performance is gained by the larger cache. There is an advantage but it is not large. I cant put any numbers on this since I havent got a BB version to benchmark.<i><b>Engineering is the fine art of making what you want from things you can get</b></i>
<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=655" target="_new">My systems</A>
It's not really an option going to another store. As I am a member of this store and have a point card for it. *grin* I'm already getting the drive for half price since I bought a digital camera last week.
The price difference is:
WD800JB = 15400yen (US$126)
WD800BB = 13800yen (US$113)
WD800EB = 12000yen (estimate)
(-7000 yen and 10% of purchase price back as credit on next purchase.)
As long as it loads games fast I am happy (games like ut2003). I was even considering going for the next model down, the 5400rpm drive if it still performs okay. I just want a reasonable performing drive with good durability and not too much noise. The 5400rpm drive will only cost me US$40 versus US$66 for the WD800JB drive. Can anyone with one of the slower models confirm that it still performs okay?
The price difference is:
WD800JB = 15400yen (US$126)
WD800BB = 13800yen (US$113)
WD800EB = 12000yen (estimate)
(-7000 yen and 10% of purchase price back as credit on next purchase.)
As long as it loads games fast I am happy (games like ut2003). I was even considering going for the next model down, the 5400rpm drive if it still performs okay. I just want a reasonable performing drive with good durability and not too much noise. The 5400rpm drive will only cost me US$40 versus US$66 for the WD800JB drive. Can anyone with one of the slower models confirm that it still performs okay?
HammerBot
Distinguished
- Jun 27, 2002
- 1,342
- 0
- 19,290
You should avoid the 5400 rpm drives. These will be (much) slower than the 800BB.
<i><b>Engineering is the fine art of making what you want from things you can get</b></i>
<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=655" target="_new">My systems</A>
<i><b>Engineering is the fine art of making what you want from things you can get</b></i>
<A HREF="http://www.btvillarin.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=655" target="_new">My systems</A>
lhgpoobaa
Illustrious
- Dec 31, 2007
- 14,462
- 1
- 40,780
Wait?
When they get the JB back in stock it could be cheaper. I like My 800JB and the high performance it provides.
Definately avoid the EB though. slow slow slow.
<b>Is that a Sidetracked Thread I see before me? - <i>William Shakespeare, Macbeth</i></b>
Officially Certified <font color=green>Hooter Inspector.</font color=green>
When they get the JB back in stock it could be cheaper. I like My 800JB and the high performance it provides.
Definately avoid the EB though. slow slow slow.
<b>Is that a Sidetracked Thread I see before me? - <i>William Shakespeare, Macbeth</i></b>
Officially Certified <font color=green>Hooter Inspector.</font color=green>
Does the cache work on a preemptive basis? I don't see the additional 6mb cache providing much of a performance gain in most situations if it doesn't. Don't most games map texture files etc to physical memory addresses? If the hard drive can guess what is going to requested next and then load it into the cache then I can see it giving a performance benefit, but if it's just caching what has just been read then how does that give a performance boost? Can you point me in the directions of some benchmarks comparing the JB and BB drives?
EDIT: drive specs
WD800JB
Rotational Speed 7,200 RPM (nominal)
Buffer Size 8 MB
Buffer To Disk 602.0 Mbits/s (Max)
Read Seek Time (Average) 8.9 ms
Write Seek Time (Average) 10.9 ms (average)
Track-To-Track Seek Time 2.0 ms (average)
Full Stroke Seek 21.0 ms (average)
Average Latency 4.2 ms (nominal)
Mode 5 Ultra ATA 100.0 MB/s
Mode 4 Ultra ATA 66.6 MB/s
Mode 2 Ultra ATA 33.3 MB/s
Mode 4 PIO 16.6 MB/s
Mode 2 multi-word DMA 16.6 MB/s
WD800BB
Rotational Speed 7,200 RPM (nominal)
Buffer Size 2 MB
Buffer To Disk 525.0 Mbits/s (Max)
Read Seek Time (Average) 8.9 ms
Write Seek Time (Average) 10.9 ms (average)
Track-To-Track Seek Time 2.0 ms (average)
Full Stroke Seek 21.0 ms (average)
Average Latency 4.2 ms (nominal)
Mode 5 Ultra ATA 100.0 MB/s
Mode 4 Ultra ATA 66.6 MB/s
Mode 2 Ultra ATA 33.3 MB/s
Mode 4 PIO 16.6 MB/s
Mode 2 multi-word DMA 16.6 MB/s
JB BB
Rotational Speed 7200 7200
Capacity 80 GB 80 GB
Interface EIDE EIDE
Average Seek Time 8.9 ms 8.9 ms
Buffer Size 8 MB 2 MB
Average Latency 4.2 ms 4.2 ms
Average Write Time 10.9 ms 10.9 ms
Buffer To Disk Transfer 602 ms 525 ms
Number of Heads 4 6
Track to Track Seek Time 2 ms 2 ms
On closer inspection it appears the JB also has 2 less drive heads (less??? I thought more was better), could this be the cause of the performance increase?
(It also appears I was a little mixed up with the 5400rpm drive above. It is actually the 800AB model not the 800EB as I remember it having a seek time of 9ms when I saw it in the store.)<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by bjon045 on 11/06/02 00:16 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
EDIT: drive specs
WD800JB
Rotational Speed 7,200 RPM (nominal)
Buffer Size 8 MB
Buffer To Disk 602.0 Mbits/s (Max)
Read Seek Time (Average) 8.9 ms
Write Seek Time (Average) 10.9 ms (average)
Track-To-Track Seek Time 2.0 ms (average)
Full Stroke Seek 21.0 ms (average)
Average Latency 4.2 ms (nominal)
Mode 5 Ultra ATA 100.0 MB/s
Mode 4 Ultra ATA 66.6 MB/s
Mode 2 Ultra ATA 33.3 MB/s
Mode 4 PIO 16.6 MB/s
Mode 2 multi-word DMA 16.6 MB/s
WD800BB
Rotational Speed 7,200 RPM (nominal)
Buffer Size 2 MB
Buffer To Disk 525.0 Mbits/s (Max)
Read Seek Time (Average) 8.9 ms
Write Seek Time (Average) 10.9 ms (average)
Track-To-Track Seek Time 2.0 ms (average)
Full Stroke Seek 21.0 ms (average)
Average Latency 4.2 ms (nominal)
Mode 5 Ultra ATA 100.0 MB/s
Mode 4 Ultra ATA 66.6 MB/s
Mode 2 Ultra ATA 33.3 MB/s
Mode 4 PIO 16.6 MB/s
Mode 2 multi-word DMA 16.6 MB/s
JB BB
Rotational Speed 7200 7200
Capacity 80 GB 80 GB
Interface EIDE EIDE
Average Seek Time 8.9 ms 8.9 ms
Buffer Size 8 MB 2 MB
Average Latency 4.2 ms 4.2 ms
Average Write Time 10.9 ms 10.9 ms
Buffer To Disk Transfer 602 ms 525 ms
Number of Heads 4 6
Track to Track Seek Time 2 ms 2 ms
On closer inspection it appears the JB also has 2 less drive heads (less??? I thought more was better), could this be the cause of the performance increase?
(It also appears I was a little mixed up with the 5400rpm drive above. It is actually the 800AB model not the 800EB as I remember it having a seek time of 9ms when I saw it in the store.)<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by bjon045 on 11/06/02 00:16 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
lhgpoobaa
Illustrious
- Dec 31, 2007
- 14,462
- 1
- 40,780
Well.
For starters I refuse to get drawn into any 8Mb vs 2Mb debate. Partially cauz i dont know enough of the technical details, partly becauze it generates extreemly long and heated debates.
Do a search of this board and you will find MANY such discussions.
Errr... JB has 2 extra heads? dont you mean BB?
(as you wrote it as 4 6 for JB BB)
Anyway... This differing number of heads is a Western Digital specific issue due to their naming scheme.
Other manufacturers have drive lines, i.e. the 120GXP and within that line have varying drive capacities.
W.D. However name thier drives one the drive capacity, and platter densities increase as time goes by, so its actually quite possible to see 2 drives with the same capacity but differing densities.
Example
1200xB - Original model has 3 x 33Gb platters with 6 heads. New model based on the 2000xB has 2 platters with 4 heads. End result, the drive with fewer heads and platters has a higher density and thus a better sustained data transfer rate. This has occured with the 800xB and the 1000xB as well.
So take care when comparing any old JB to a BB. The have to have the same density for a valid comparison.
If you want some nice benchies <A HREF="http://www.storagereview.com" target="_new">http://www.storagereview.com</A> have some in their article archive.
<b>Tits a nice day today!
Breast i've ever seen!</b>
Officially Certified <font color=green>Hooter Inspector.</font color=green>
For starters I refuse to get drawn into any 8Mb vs 2Mb debate. Partially cauz i dont know enough of the technical details, partly becauze it generates extreemly long and heated debates.
Do a search of this board and you will find MANY such discussions.
Errr... JB has 2 extra heads? dont you mean BB?
(as you wrote it as 4 6 for JB BB)
Anyway... This differing number of heads is a Western Digital specific issue due to their naming scheme.
Other manufacturers have drive lines, i.e. the 120GXP and within that line have varying drive capacities.
W.D. However name thier drives one the drive capacity, and platter densities increase as time goes by, so its actually quite possible to see 2 drives with the same capacity but differing densities.
Example
1200xB - Original model has 3 x 33Gb platters with 6 heads. New model based on the 2000xB has 2 platters with 4 heads. End result, the drive with fewer heads and platters has a higher density and thus a better sustained data transfer rate. This has occured with the 800xB and the 1000xB as well.
So take care when comparing any old JB to a BB. The have to have the same density for a valid comparison.
If you want some nice benchies <A HREF="http://www.storagereview.com" target="_new">http://www.storagereview.com</A> have some in their article archive.
<b>Tits a nice day today!
Breast i've ever seen!</b>
Officially Certified <font color=green>Hooter Inspector.</font color=green>
Touche. I guess I'll do the same, or almost. Yet another tired old reference to the conclusions at the end of the <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/storage/13-idehdd-roundup/" target="_new">X-bit Labs IDE roundup</A> wouldn't be too out of place, I hope?
____
<font color=green><i>Work is the curse of the drinking classes. --- Oscar Wilde</i></font color=green>
____
<font color=green><i>Work is the curse of the drinking classes. --- Oscar Wilde</i></font color=green>
I would wait for the JB. It is faster, but it also comes with a 3 year warranty where the BB only comes with a 1 year warranty.
<font color=blue>I want to save the world for my children, but not my children's children, because children shouldn't be having sex. - Deep Thought</font color=blue>
<font color=blue>I want to save the world for my children, but not my children's children, because children shouldn't be having sex. - Deep Thought</font color=blue>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram