Swapping to a faster HDD...
in [Laptops]
|
From: ~misfit~ on 13 May 2010 19:10 A week or two back I mentioned that I routinely replace my laptop HDDs with 7,200 rpm models and I was asked if it made much of a difference. Alas, t'was a huge post and I checked it when I didn't have time to write an extensive reply and now it's lost to me... Yes, I find it makes a big difference. The machine is far more responsive and startup /shutdown times are quicker. I've been working with T60 ThinkPads recently, most of which come standard with an Hitachi 5,400 rpm drive. My replacement drive of preference is a Seagate Momentus 7200.4 320GB. This T60 is running XP Pro and actually came with a 100GB Hitachi 7,200 rpm drive. It's a high-spec T60. However swapping to a 7200.4 still made a noticable difference. Perhaps the 16MB buffer is part of that? I've also noticed that the HDD temps are about on par with each other. Anyway, I just swapped another T60 5,400 rpm Hitachi HDD for a Seagate 7200.4 and, as it's running Windows 7 Ultimate I now have some 'hard data' in the form of Microsoft's 'Windows Experience Index' benchmarks that I can post. With the 60GB (in this case) faultless (according to Hard Disk Sentinel) Hitachi 5,400 rpm HDD fitted and a new install of 7 Ult. the WEI HDD score was 4.3. I cloned the install onto a 50GB partition on a new 320GB Seagate Momentus 7200.4 and re-ran the WEI. This time the HDD score was 5.9. So, up from 4.3 to 5.9, quite a big jump, which bears out my experience of the improved usability and responsiveness of going to a (Seagate 7200.4 in particular) 7,200 rpm HDD. The latest gen SSDs are even better (but not as much when it comes to using them as the raw data would indicate according to what I've been hearing) but at the prices and capacities currently available not a realistic option (at least for me). When I can get a nice 15" T60 with a C2D and FlexView IPS screen for less than twice what a 128GB SSD would cost me I'd rather buy another T60 for spares (as they were the zenith of laptop design and functionality IMO) or whatever than buy an SSD. Maybe next year, or the year after, when I'm sure my T60s will still be running fine and doing all that I ask of them. For now going from a 5,400 rpm HDD to a 7,200 rpm [mechanical] HDD remains the most cost-effective and noticably faster upgrade for a laptop IMO. The 'old' 5,400 rpm units get put into external enclosures here (or UltraBay adapters) to be used as data drives where their relative slowness isn't such an issue. HTH, -- Shaun. "When we dream.... that's just our brains defragmenting" G Jackson.
From: RnR on 19 May 2010 08:22 On Fri, 14 May 2010 11:10:50 +1200, "~misfit~" <sore_n_happy(a)nospamyahoo.com.au> wrote: >A week or two back I mentioned that I routinely replace my laptop HDDs with >7,200 rpm models and I was asked if it made much of a difference. Alas, >t'was a huge post and I checked it when I didn't have time to write an >extensive reply and now it's lost to me... > >Yes, I find it makes a big difference. The machine is far more responsive >and startup /shutdown times are quicker. I've been working with T60 >ThinkPads recently, most of which come standard with an Hitachi 5,400 rpm >drive. My replacement drive of preference is a Seagate Momentus 7200.4 >320GB. This T60 is running XP Pro and actually came with a 100GB Hitachi >7,200 rpm drive. It's a high-spec T60. However swapping to a 7200.4 still >made a noticable difference. Perhaps the 16MB buffer is part of that? I've >also noticed that the HDD temps are about on par with each other. > >Anyway, I just swapped another T60 5,400 rpm Hitachi HDD for a Seagate >7200.4 and, as it's running Windows 7 Ultimate I now have some 'hard data' >in the form of Microsoft's 'Windows Experience Index' benchmarks that I can >post. > >With the 60GB (in this case) faultless (according to Hard Disk Sentinel) >Hitachi 5,400 rpm HDD fitted and a new install of 7 Ult. the WEI HDD score >was 4.3. I cloned the install onto a 50GB partition on a new 320GB Seagate >Momentus 7200.4 and re-ran the WEI. This time the HDD score was 5.9. > >So, up from 4.3 to 5.9, quite a big jump, which bears out my experience of >the improved usability and responsiveness of going to a (Seagate 7200.4 in >particular) 7,200 rpm HDD. > >The latest gen SSDs are even better (but not as much when it comes to using >them as the raw data would indicate according to what I've been hearing) but >at the prices and capacities currently available not a realistic option (at >least for me). When I can get a nice 15" T60 with a C2D and FlexView IPS >screen for less than twice what a 128GB SSD would cost me I'd rather buy >another T60 for spares (as they were the zenith of laptop design and >functionality IMO) or whatever than buy an SSD. > >Maybe next year, or the year after, when I'm sure my T60s will still be >running fine and doing all that I ask of them. For now going from a 5,400 >rpm HDD to a 7,200 rpm [mechanical] HDD remains the most cost-effective and >noticably faster upgrade for a laptop IMO. The 'old' 5,400 rpm units get put >into external enclosures here (or UltraBay adapters) to be used as data >drives where their relative slowness isn't such an issue. > >HTH, I've also bumped up my laptop HD to 7200 but I can't say I noticed as big an increase as you but I did notice it. I don't do benchmarks because it's like statistics. They can be very misleading or deceiving. To be honest, depending on what apps you run will determine how noticeable the speed increase is. Of course whether noticed or not, the drive will be faster and I agree that the boot up time, etc.. will be faster. One thing tho you didn't mention is that the 7200's run hotter because of the faster speeds so that may or may not need to be considered.
From: John Doue on 19 May 2010 11:00 On 5/19/2010 3:22 PM, RnR wrote: > On Fri, 14 May 2010 11:10:50 +1200, "~misfit~" > <sore_n_happy(a)nospamyahoo.com.au> wrote: > >> A week or two back I mentioned that I routinely replace my laptop HDDs with >> 7,200 rpm models and I was asked if it made much of a difference. Alas, >> t'was a huge post and I checked it when I didn't have time to write an >> extensive reply and now it's lost to me... >> >> Yes, I find it makes a big difference. The machine is far more responsive >> and startup /shutdown times are quicker. I've been working with T60 >> ThinkPads recently, most of which come standard with an Hitachi 5,400 rpm >> drive. My replacement drive of preference is a Seagate Momentus 7200.4 >> 320GB. This T60 is running XP Pro and actually came with a 100GB Hitachi >> 7,200 rpm drive. It's a high-spec T60. However swapping to a 7200.4 still >> made a noticable difference. Perhaps the 16MB buffer is part of that? I've >> also noticed that the HDD temps are about on par with each other. >> >> Anyway, I just swapped another T60 5,400 rpm Hitachi HDD for a Seagate >> 7200.4 and, as it's running Windows 7 Ultimate I now have some 'hard data' >> in the form of Microsoft's 'Windows Experience Index' benchmarks that I can >> post. >> >> With the 60GB (in this case) faultless (according to Hard Disk Sentinel) >> Hitachi 5,400 rpm HDD fitted and a new install of 7 Ult. the WEI HDD score >> was 4.3. I cloned the install onto a 50GB partition on a new 320GB Seagate >> Momentus 7200.4 and re-ran the WEI. This time the HDD score was 5.9. >> >> So, up from 4.3 to 5.9, quite a big jump, which bears out my experience of >> the improved usability and responsiveness of going to a (Seagate 7200.4 in >> particular) 7,200 rpm HDD. >> >> The latest gen SSDs are even better (but not as much when it comes to using >> them as the raw data would indicate according to what I've been hearing) but >> at the prices and capacities currently available not a realistic option (at >> least for me). When I can get a nice 15" T60 with a C2D and FlexView IPS >> screen for less than twice what a 128GB SSD would cost me I'd rather buy >> another T60 for spares (as they were the zenith of laptop design and >> functionality IMO) or whatever than buy an SSD. >> >> Maybe next year, or the year after, when I'm sure my T60s will still be >> running fine and doing all that I ask of them. For now going from a 5,400 >> rpm HDD to a 7,200 rpm [mechanical] HDD remains the most cost-effective and >> noticably faster upgrade for a laptop IMO. The 'old' 5,400 rpm units get put >> into external enclosures here (or UltraBay adapters) to be used as data >> drives where their relative slowness isn't such an issue. >> >> HTH, > > > I've also bumped up my laptop HD to 7200 but I can't say I noticed as > big an increase as you but I did notice it. I don't do benchmarks > because it's like statistics. They can be very misleading or > deceiving. To be honest, depending on what apps you run will > determine how noticeable the speed increase is. Of course whether > noticed or not, the drive will be faster and I agree that the boot up > time, etc.. will be faster. > > One thing tho you didn't mention is that the 7200's run hotter > because of the faster speeds so that may or may not need to be > considered. Although your assertion about heat seems, on the surface (pun intended), to be warranted, I am not sure there will be a noticeable difference, if one at all. One thing I would mention though, is the vibration issue. Depending on the drive and the way it is mounted in the laptop, I have found vibrations in the wrist rest can be noticed, and that would be, at least for me, a no-no. Bottom-line: the cost of a new HD being fairly reasonable, I would try and see if I like it. The performance difference, I am not sure I would notice; it would be there, most probably, but in every day's use, I do not think it is important enough to justify, by itself, a purchase. -- John Doue
From: RnR on 19 May 2010 12:58 On Wed, 19 May 2010 18:00:01 +0300, John Doue <notwobe(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On 5/19/2010 3:22 PM, RnR wrote: >> On Fri, 14 May 2010 11:10:50 +1200, "~misfit~" >> <sore_n_happy(a)nospamyahoo.com.au> wrote: >> >>> A week or two back I mentioned that I routinely replace my laptop HDDs with >>> 7,200 rpm models and I was asked if it made much of a difference. Alas, >>> t'was a huge post and I checked it when I didn't have time to write an >>> extensive reply and now it's lost to me... >>> >>> Yes, I find it makes a big difference. The machine is far more responsive >>> and startup /shutdown times are quicker. I've been working with T60 >>> ThinkPads recently, most of which come standard with an Hitachi 5,400 rpm >>> drive. My replacement drive of preference is a Seagate Momentus 7200.4 >>> 320GB. This T60 is running XP Pro and actually came with a 100GB Hitachi >>> 7,200 rpm drive. It's a high-spec T60. However swapping to a 7200.4 still >>> made a noticable difference. Perhaps the 16MB buffer is part of that? I've >>> also noticed that the HDD temps are about on par with each other. >>> >>> Anyway, I just swapped another T60 5,400 rpm Hitachi HDD for a Seagate >>> 7200.4 and, as it's running Windows 7 Ultimate I now have some 'hard data' >>> in the form of Microsoft's 'Windows Experience Index' benchmarks that I can >>> post. >>> >>> With the 60GB (in this case) faultless (according to Hard Disk Sentinel) >>> Hitachi 5,400 rpm HDD fitted and a new install of 7 Ult. the WEI HDD score >>> was 4.3. I cloned the install onto a 50GB partition on a new 320GB Seagate >>> Momentus 7200.4 and re-ran the WEI. This time the HDD score was 5.9. >>> >>> So, up from 4.3 to 5.9, quite a big jump, which bears out my experience of >>> the improved usability and responsiveness of going to a (Seagate 7200.4 in >>> particular) 7,200 rpm HDD. >>> >>> The latest gen SSDs are even better (but not as much when it comes to using >>> them as the raw data would indicate according to what I've been hearing) but >>> at the prices and capacities currently available not a realistic option (at >>> least for me). When I can get a nice 15" T60 with a C2D and FlexView IPS >>> screen for less than twice what a 128GB SSD would cost me I'd rather buy >>> another T60 for spares (as they were the zenith of laptop design and >>> functionality IMO) or whatever than buy an SSD. >>> >>> Maybe next year, or the year after, when I'm sure my T60s will still be >>> running fine and doing all that I ask of them. For now going from a 5,400 >>> rpm HDD to a 7,200 rpm [mechanical] HDD remains the most cost-effective and >>> noticably faster upgrade for a laptop IMO. The 'old' 5,400 rpm units get put >>> into external enclosures here (or UltraBay adapters) to be used as data >>> drives where their relative slowness isn't such an issue. >>> >>> HTH, >> >> >> I've also bumped up my laptop HD to 7200 but I can't say I noticed as >> big an increase as you but I did notice it. I don't do benchmarks >> because it's like statistics. They can be very misleading or >> deceiving. To be honest, depending on what apps you run will >> determine how noticeable the speed increase is. Of course whether >> noticed or not, the drive will be faster and I agree that the boot up >> time, etc.. will be faster. >> >> One thing tho you didn't mention is that the 7200's run hotter >> because of the faster speeds so that may or may not need to be >> considered. > >Although your assertion about heat seems, on the surface (pun intended), >to be warranted, I am not sure there will be a noticeable difference, if >one at all. > >One thing I would mention though, is the vibration issue. Depending on >the drive and the way it is mounted in the laptop, I have found >vibrations in the wrist rest can be noticed, and that would be, at least >for me, a no-no. > >Bottom-line: the cost of a new HD being fairly reasonable, I would try >and see if I like it. The performance difference, I am not sure I would >notice; it would be there, most probably, but in every day's use, I do >not think it is important enough to justify, by itself, a purchase. John, the noticeable difference in heat depends on the laptop, drive and I forgot, the person. On newegg.com similar drives (5400 vs 7200) differ by $5.00 so probably 7200 is worth purchasing nowadays. I expect 5400 is becoming a dinosaur. They used to be a much bigger difference in price. I agree with you on vibration. I guess the specs would tell all tho you could dampen it with wrist bands if necessary. For me, it's not an issue.
From: Bob Villa on 19 May 2010 14:15
On May 19, 11:58 am, "RnR" <rnrte...(a)gmail.com> wrote: ....more heat...faster speed. Won't battery run-time take a hit? If you run on battery often...I wonder if it's worth it?! bob |