RSS Feed

HCW Tech Blog

For the latest info on computer hardware, tech, news, video games, software tips, and Linux, check out our new improved front page: HCW Tech Blog

Reviewed by: Norman Tan [03.03.06]
Manufactured by: Hitachi, Seagate



The large capacities of these drives make them ideal for use in server environments where rack space is at a premium. The IOMeter tests could be considered to be worse case scenarios for disk loading and are generally accurate representations of real world performance. For each queue depth, the drives were allowed to spin up for 60 seconds and then the test was run at 30 minutes.

The File Server test features a mix of reads and writes, while the Web Server test is almost all reads.



This time, the drives swap places. It is interesting to note that the Hitachi drive does a bit better in the mixed read/write test, while the drives are quite even in the web server test.

Windows XP Boot Time

Testing boot time is a little tricky with Raid 0 because each drive needs to spin up thus adding to the overal time needed to boot. To overcome this, the stop watch was started after the drives had spun up and stopped when the hour glass in Windows disappeared. A fresh copy of Windows XP SP2 was installed on the drives each time.


Perhaps PCMark wasn't too far off. Something was definitely off with the RAID 0 results of the Seagate drives and this article will be updated if/when an explanation for the results can be found.

Doom 3 Load Time

Doom 3 was copied to the target drives and the amount of time it took for a new level to load was timed.


The results from the Windows XP boot up test were not repeated and we see that the Seagate drives are a touch faster than the Hitachis.

If we took out the PCmark and Windows XP boot up tests, it would be hard to choose between the two drives as they offer very similar performance on all other tests. However, when one looks all the test results, it makes it hard to recommend the Seagate hard drive over the Hitachi. As mentioned, it was not so much that the Seagate drives were slow, in fact, the numbers that they put up were very much in line with other SATA drives. It's just that the Hitachi drives were fast.. incredibly fast and very consistent across the benchmarks.

If we were looking at pure performance, then yes, the nod would go to the Hitachi drives. However, one must also consider other factors in play. Given the rather large size of these drives, it is unlikely that a person would install their OS and programs on these drives. Rather, they would function more as data storage drives. What will matter here is the type of data being stored and how they are used.

For some, these drives will be the ultimate form of DVD archiving. Put four of these in a box and you could store the images of over 200 DVDs. Compress them using DiVX and you are looking at the ability to store close to 2000 movies. In a situation like that, perhaps the Seagate would be a better choice. Streaming single DVD movies is not disk intensive and the five year warranty is hard to resist.

On the other hand, if one did want to use this drive to store programs and possibly even the OS, then the Hitachi would be a much better choice. The three year warranty is nothing to scoff at and the performance lead it had over the Seagate drives was undeniable.

No matter what drive you go with though, you'll get the world's largest capacity hard drive in your computer.