Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Laptop Ultrathin HDD Tech Specs And Benchmark System

Seagate Laptop Ultrathin HDD Review: 500 GB In 5 mm Of Space
By , Achim Roos

Technical Specifications

ManufacturerSeagate
ModelLaptop Ultrathin HDD
Model Number
ST500LT032
InterfaceSATA 6 Gb/s
Form Factor2.5" (5 mm)
Capacity500 GB
RPM5400 RPM
Platters1
Cache16 MB
Operating Temperature
0-60°C
Maximum Data Transfer Rate (Official Specifications)
100 MB/s
Power Consumption at Idle (Official Specifications)0.48 W
Power Consumption at Idle (Measured)0.50 W
Shock Tolerance (2 ms, read)400 G

Benchmark System

Benchmark System Hardware
HardwareDetails
CPUIntel Core i5-2500K (32 nm, Sandy Bridge, D2), 4C/4T, 3.3 GHz, 4 x 256 KB L2 Cache, 6 MB L3 Cache, w/ HD Graphics 3000, 95 W TDP, 3.7 GHz max. Turbo
Motherboard (LGA 1155)Gigabyte Z68X-UD3H-B3, Revision: 0.2, Chipset: Intel Z68 Express, BIOS: F3
RAM2 x 2 GB DDR3-1333, Corsair TR3X6G1600C8D
System SSDIntel X25-M G1, 80 GB, Firmware 0701, SATA 3 Gb/s
ControllerIntel PCH Z68 Express SATA 6Gb/s
Power Supply
Seasonic X-760 760 W, SS-760KM Active PFC F3
Benchmark Software
Synthetic Benchmarks
h2benchw 3.16
PCMark 7 1.0.4
I/O Performance Benchmarks
IOMeter 2006.07.27
File Server Benchmark
Web Server Benchmark
Database Benchmark
Workstation Benchmark
Streaming Reads
Streaming Writes
4 KB Random Reads
4 KB Random Writes
System Software and Drivers
Software / Driver
Details
Operating System
Windows 7 x64 Ultimate SP1
Intel Inf9.2.0.1030
Intel Rapid Storage 10.​5.​0.​1026
Display all 33 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 29 Hide
    razor512 , July 31, 2013 9:34 PM
    For the hard drive being benchmarked, is it possible for tomshardware to color the text to make them easier to find in the list?

    for example http://i.imgur.com/VXwTs6y.jpg

    it only takes about 3 seconds to do (even faster if you are in the process of making the chart and not changing colors in post)
Other Comments
  • 9 Hide
    nevilence , July 31, 2013 9:29 PM
    makes ya wonder how small this format can go. impressive.
  • 29 Hide
    razor512 , July 31, 2013 9:34 PM
    For the hard drive being benchmarked, is it possible for tomshardware to color the text to make them easier to find in the list?

    for example http://i.imgur.com/VXwTs6y.jpg

    it only takes about 3 seconds to do (even faster if you are in the process of making the chart and not changing colors in post)
  • 5 Hide
    Someone Somewhere , July 31, 2013 10:07 PM
    Quote:
    Its main selling point is the fact that it's only 5 mm thick, instead of the 9.5"

    Think you meant 9.5mm there.

    At least it's not got proprietary connectors like the WD 5mm ones do. Think you need to add one of those to the benchmarks though - it's Seagate's biggest competition.
  • -4 Hide
    slomo4sho , July 31, 2013 11:04 PM
    This would be a good choice for a mITX build when you want budget storage to complement a SSD.
  • 1 Hide
    Someone Somewhere , July 31, 2013 11:28 PM
    Not really; it'll cost significantly more per GB than a 9.5mm drive, but all the bays are fine with the thicker drives.
  • -3 Hide
    slomo4sho , July 31, 2013 11:54 PM
    Quote:
    Not really; it'll cost significantly more per GB than a 9.5mm drive, but all the bays are fine with the thicker drives.


    Regular thickness drives are $60-80 and this one is mentioned to be under $100 with no price given for the consumer market. I wouldn't mind paying a small premium for a drive that utilizes 53% of the area of a 9.5mm drive.
  • 6 Hide
    Someone Somewhere , August 1, 2013 1:07 AM
    The thing is there's nothing you can do with the extra space; it's a couple of millimeters in the middle of an HDD cage
  • -6 Hide
    XngXtuHl , August 1, 2013 1:11 AM
    No point in 5 mm HDD, any laptop can install regular 9 mm HDD
    More expensive, more slower
  • 6 Hide
    Flying-Q , August 1, 2013 1:12 AM
    Please Tom's, get rid of the new format for pictures having the caption as an alpha-blended banner overlapping the bottom of the picture. This article's second picture, which attempts to illustrate the thinness of the new drive, is ruined by the new captioning method. Use some intelligence and put the caption UNDER the picture. This is the way that has worked for decades in both print and online. Why change something that works for a system that fails?
  • 4 Hide
    Someone Somewhere , August 1, 2013 1:14 AM
    Quote:
    No point in 5 mm HDD, any laptop can install regular 9 mm HDD
    More expensive, more slower


    Nope, ultrabooks often have 7mm slots or none, and soon I'd expect that to be 5mm.
  • 4 Hide
    m32 , August 1, 2013 3:39 AM
    XngXtuHl, this HD is really about fitting in the 'ultra-book' form factor.
  • 1 Hide
    slomo4sho , August 1, 2013 6:16 AM
    Quote:
    The thing is there's nothing you can do with the extra space; it's a couple of millimeters in the middle of an HDD cage


    Who said anything about a HDD cage?
  • 0 Hide
    razor512 , August 1, 2013 8:01 AM
    There is one interesting use that I can think of. A new laptop, in place of the DVD drive, you can have 2 slots for ultra thin hard drives in addition to a standard SSD.

    Allowing for a lot of extra storage, or RAID 1 bulk storage since it is common place for laptops to use SSD's now but it is also well known that you should always backup your important data and keep bulk data off of the SSD. (SSD= OS and applications only)
  • 0 Hide
    Tuishimi , August 1, 2013 8:19 AM
    @someone somewhere

    Remember the old wash tub disk drive disk packs? Even they were only like 6" tall tho'. :) 
  • 0 Hide
    jaber2 , August 1, 2013 9:06 AM
    Why not go with SSD? stop using these mechanical drives already, when I shop for monitor I can't find crt anymore, lets make it the same.
  • -1 Hide
    lamorpa , August 1, 2013 9:34 AM
    jaber2 said, "Why not go with SSD? stop using these mechanical drives already, when I shop for monitor I can't find crt anymore, lets make it the same."

    You can get an answer to your question in an article on this subject - the article on this page (if you read it)
  • 0 Hide
    Leamon , August 1, 2013 10:17 AM
    This technology should be used with iPod classics! They're so unpopular because the only ones who buy one are people with alot of music and videos, and the highest capacity they offer is 160Gb. That's not very much for movie files, especially HD/ Bluray ones. Apple might be better off adopting technology like this!
  • 0 Hide
    Onus , August 1, 2013 10:55 AM
    I'd have to wonder about the durability of a drive like this, especially in a tablet or other thin form factor that might flex, even a little.
  • 0 Hide
    danwat1234 , August 1, 2013 12:29 PM
    Quote:
    This technology should be used with iPod classics! They're so unpopular because the only ones who buy one are people with alot of music and videos, and the highest capacity they offer is 160Gb. That's not very much for movie files, especially HD/ Bluray ones. Apple might be better off adopting technology like this!

    The current hard drive based ipods use 1.8" 1 platter drives, not sure of the thickness, 7mm?
    so they'd have to have a larger chassis in length/width but not as much thickness.
    With current platter densities, Apple could put in a 250GB 1.8" 1 platter drive in their ipods
  • 0 Hide
    restrain_oligopolies , August 2, 2013 5:59 AM
    Reliability?
    I'm more interested in reliability than speed.
    One would suspect 1 platter to be more reliable than 2, 3, or 4 platters.
    The article doesn't mention how many heads, 1 or 2.
    Again, I suspect 1 head more reliable than 2 heads.
    Unfortunately, Tomshardware can't test 5 year reliability, but there might be data somewhere on improved reliability of 1 platter and of 1 head.
Display more comments