Prev: 194492 Answers to your Computer question! 58
Next: winDLG alternative for 64 bit systems
From: Franc Zabkar on 5 Feb 2010 02:00
This Seagate forum thread shows inferior performance results for
Barracuda drives installed vertically as opposed to horizontally:
http://forums.seagate.com/stx/board/message?board.id=ata_drives&view=by_date_ascending&message.id=17546#M17546

Can anyone offer a reason for the difference?

BTW the results are repeatable over several drives, so it appears to
be a design issue.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
From: Arno on 5 Feb 2010 20:51
Franc Zabkar <fzabkar(a)iinternode.on.net> wrote:
> This Seagate forum thread shows inferior performance results for
> Barracuda drives installed vertically as opposed to horizontally:
> http://forums.seagate.com/stx/board/message?board.id=ata_drives&view=by_date_ascending&message.id=17546#M17546

> Can anyone offer a reason for the difference?

> BTW the results are repeatable over several drives, so it appears to
> be a design issue.

I would suspect that the vertical mounting was inferiour
mechanically.

Arno
--
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno(a)wagner.name
GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans
From: Franc Zabkar on 6 Feb 2010 05:09
On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 02:23:26 +0000 (UTC),
calypso(a)fly.srk.fer.hr.invalid put finger to keyboard and composed:

>Franc Zabkar <fzabkar(a)iinternode.on.net> kenjka:
>> This Seagate forum thread shows inferior performance results for
>> Barracuda drives installed vertically as opposed to horizontally:
>> http://forums.seagate.com/stx/board/message?board.id=ata_drives&view=by_date_ascending&message.id=17546#M17546
>
>> Can anyone offer a reason for the difference?
>
>> BTW the results are repeatable over several drives, so it appears to
>> be a design issue.
>
>Hi Franc,
>
>this is something I've never heard of! In fact, all drives I've heard about
>had no problems with mounting, either vertical or horizontal...
>
>But, if there is a problem with random seek time that's rapidly rising when
>in vertical position, then the possibility I can think of right now is that
>weaker magnets or magnetic field in voice coil of the actuator are used...

I don't believe that seek time is affected. I suspect that the
increased access times in the vertical orientation may be caused by
read retries. Each retry would add a rotational latency of 8.33ms (one
revolution) to the access time. I believe this interpretation fits the
HD Tune performance graph.

>The mentioned drives are all using perpendicular technology for surface
>recording, and since the tracks are much closer to each other, maybe there
>could be some gravitational or simply actuator momentum issues...
>
>And one more possible explanation... Preamplifier for the signal coming from
>the read/write heads is on these type of drives glued, not soldered... So,
>maybe there is a design flaw and glue is not holding the preamplifier chip
>as it's supposed to... Especially in vertical position and if drive is a bit
>hot...

That's what I suggested at first, but the same problem occurs with a
new drive.

>And then, the clicking sound, it's caused when acutator arm hits the inner
>most part of the platter... Could be that there is a positioning problem
>because of the weak magnet/voice coil or bad preamplifier (signal is not
>detected, and there is no feedback, so the control unit of the disk drive is
>sending the actuator arm all around to try to find so called servo burst
>info to calculate a position)...
>
>
>I'd bet on this last one, but anything is possible...

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: 194492 Answers to your Computer question! 58
Next: winDLG alternative for 64 bit systems