Originally Posted by tommeboy
I have 2 x 2TB 5900rpm drives (over 1 year now) and they are not bad at all.
You may have a point that the 5900rpm may have actually better throughput
I don't have a 4TB (yet)
But I do have several of the other SEAGATE drives
below are benchmarks on a new rig (running SATA iii)
SEAGATE 2TB 5900rpm ST2000DL003
READ 141.6 MB/s
WRITE 140.6 MB/s
Seagate 2TB 7200rpm ST2000DM001
READ 164.7 MB/s
WRITE 160.8 MB/s
SEAGATE 3TB 7200rpm ST3000DM001
READ 136.9 MB/s
WRITE 130.9 MB/s
also just for reference
Vertex 4 256GB SSD
READ 495.8 MB/s
WRITE 433.8 MB/s
You are posting specs for the old version of the 7200rpm with 5 platters of 600MB. That's two generations old technology. If you compare to a 1TB platter x 3 platter model the read and write average is about 160MB/sec and the max is 210MB/sec.
Not a big deal, but it's faster.
Cybersage is right in that the 5900rpm 4TB seagate is an excellent performer- it's faster than basically every low spindle speed drive out there. It's a good deal faster than a 5400rpm WD, or a 5400rpm Hitachi. So the difference between a 5900rpm 4TB and a 7200rpm is much less a big deal. If you want the extra size of the 4TB there is little reason to not get it.
When you compare a 3TB 7200rpm that read/write @ 160MB/sec to a 3 or 4TB 5400rpm that reads and writes at under 100MB/sec then you start to see a significant difference. Particularly if you run something like software raid (I use Flexraid) where the slower drive speed has a negative effect on your parity times, and adding another 1TB to read and write at a slower speed makes the process take twice as long. At that point you no longer can complete the task overnight - which is bothersome if you are trying to use the server and it's still half way through the task.
3TB are better for snapshot raid software raid set ups in media servers, as is faster HDD's.
As a desktop drive- 4TB is probably better.
both would work for both so .... pick your poison.
I do think 5900rpm is a better compromise between spindle speed, performance, energy etc.... 5400rpm is not worth the trade off. I hate 5400rpm drive generally. The negatives of 5400rpm outweight the postives in desktop, HTPC, or media server applications. Only if you had a small NAS box with very limited air flow and cooling would I suggest something like a WD RED. Otherwise it's purely a waste of money. (opinion) It's slower, cost more- and it's not more reliable. The 3 year warranty is nice, but compare to a 2 year is it worth $30 more ? Not to me.