7200 rpm hard disks

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 49
    Ok, well thanks for all the insightful responses.



    It seems that on balance I'd be better off getting a 5400 drive in the interests of battery life and investing in more ram if I want better day-to-day performance.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 49
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by e1618978

    Buy a ton of memory to solve the beach ball problem. If you open so many apps, you will use up the memory and start virtual memory swapping (which is slow regardless of what drive you get, hard drives are slow across the board compared to RAM).



    I totally agree. Plenty of RAM will always help, laptop or desktop.



    I use two Dual 2 GHz G5s, one at home and one at the office. The office one was not my purchase and thus has far less RAM, 1 GB versus the 2.5 GB I have at home. And I notice a significant difference between the two systems even when I only had 1.5 GB at home!



    Also, regarding the HDs, its nice that drive spec comparisons are listed on that site. While it will place more of a strain on the battery I still think I'd go with the 7200 RPM drive especially since it makes practically the same amount of noise. Obviously if I could get a fast capacious drive I'd go that route.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 49
    Quote:

    Originally posted by e1618978

    Here are comparisons between the two drives that I think are probably in there (somebody correct me if I am wrong):



    http://www.silentpcreview.com/Sectio...artid-264.html

    http://www.silentpcreview.com/Sectio...artid-278.html



    The 7200 rpm drive is slightly faster, and uses 20% more power, with the same noise level.



    I would go with the 120gb drive myself.




    Thanks for the excellent articles, i will go for the 120gb drive!! defnitly now... and 2 gig ram should be enough for some years on my macbook...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 49
    elixirelixir Posts: 782member
    i was previously thinkig of getting the 7200 drive but if it eats battery then i prob wont get it either.



    the macbook doesn't seem to have the great battery life we thought it would so adding more power guzzling specs wont help
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 49
    socrates,



    my honest apologies. In re-reading my own post, it did come across as b1tchy, and I _really_ didn't mean that. It's just the kind of thing where we can all make judgement calls, sway you one way or the other, and then if you're not happy we look/feel bad, when really the important thing is that you make the right decision for you, based on your judgements. Obviously I should've been less kurt in my response.



    And in reading through the thread it looks like you did get some good advice. My impression from reviews I've read is that there's little advantage in speed when going with 7200rpm vs. 5400rpm. And as mentioned the 7200rpm drives do tend to use more power and generate more heat.



    Again, my sincere apologies for coming across so snippy.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 49
    I'd opt for the 7200 rpm drive. In my experience, HD speed is a huge factor in OS X performance, especially if you tend to run lots of apps at once and use lots of memory. Doesn't matter how much physical RAM you have - OS X will be paging out and in and a 5400 rpm drive seems to be a big performance hit.



    I use both an 800 MHz iMac G4 with a 5400 RPM drive, and a Powermac G4 "Sawtooth" 400 MHz tower with a 7200 RPM drive. The iMac does a few things faster, and I've measured higher frame rates in Quake 3A, for example, but in real world use my Sawtooth just feels faster. Not a scientific comparison, but a representative anecdote of the importance of HD performance IMO.



    Sorry, I don't have any benchmarks for you, all I'm offering is my own experience and opinion.



    Want to know what I'd do if it were my MacBook Pro? I'd buy it with the cheapest HD option, then buy a compatible after-market 7200 rpm drive with boku capacity and install that sucker myself. It would cost less than Apple's BTO BS, and while installing the HD I'd put in my own RAM.



    If you want to find some good hardware tests and reader reviews, then check out the articles at Accelerate Your Mac and their database of reader hardware reviews.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 49
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg

    I'



    Want to know what I'd do if it were my MacBook Pro? I'd buy it with the cheapest HD option, then buy a compatible after-market 7200 rpm drive with boku capacity and install that sucker myself. It would cost less than Apple's BTO BS, and while installing the HD I'd put in my own RAM.

    [/url]




    I was thinking that also... when they come with the 250gb 7200 rpm ... but voids your waranty right ?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 49
    halsehalse Posts: 53member
    I ordered the 7200 since the MBP will be doing a lot of photo editing (and there will be network storage at home by the time the MBP arrives)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 49
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sternone

    I was thinking that also... when they come with the 250gb 7200 rpm ... but voids your waranty right ?



    I believe so. Good reason not to buy a 1st revision MacBook Pro.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 49
    Quote:

    Originally posted by concentricity

    ...my honest apologies...



    Don't worry about it, must have been an off-day :-P
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 49
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg

    I'd opt for the 7200 rpm drive...



    Dammit, just when I thought we had a consensus :-)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 49
    kcmackcmac Posts: 1,051member
    I'm with JD on the 7200. When we added a faster drive to our older iMac it made a noticeable difference. We already had a gig of memory.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 49
    e1618978e1618978 Posts: 6,075member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kcmac

    I'm with JD on the 7200. When we added a faster drive to our older iMac it made a noticeable difference. We already had a gig of memory.



    But these particular two drives are not that different in speed. If you went from a 4500 rpm or 5400 rpm small drive to a 7200 rpm big drive then I could see a difference.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 49
    My advice is to go with the 7200 rpm hard disk. Although they tend to draw a little more power in operation they are also faster at reading and writing which means that disk operations will be finished faster and that somewhat compensates as far as power is concerned. And yes there is a definitive difference with regards to performance. Hard disks are often a significant bottleneck in your system and the faster they are the better. If I were to buy a MacBook Pro today, I would have opted for the significantly faster but slightly smaller 7200 rpm hard disk.



    Also, with regards to performance, it is important that the hard disk comes with (at least) 8 Mb cache memory. But I think that that is true of all 5400 and 7200 rpm hard disks on the market today.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 49
  • Reply 36 of 49


    These are great articles, but on saterday i ordered my macbook pro 1,8ghz with 2gb ram and i ordered 120mb 5400rpm.. i'm to scared of the drain of the battery life...anyways, if after some years we have 250g 7200rpm or whatever comes out, i still can switch the hd myselfs.. i dont think that will be to hard to do it.. for me the 20gb extra i will use if eventually i run also windows in dual boot on it, or some linux distro.. (windows at one time WILL run on it, we all now that :-))
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 49
    Baaed on everthing I've read, I've gone with the 100GB 7200RPM drive - While the additional 20GB would be nice, since I really use my laptop as a desktop most of the time - i.e. it's powered, I'm not too concerned about a slightly lower battery life and the responiveness of the system when handling large files (>2GB i.e. using virtual memory a lot) is more important to me.



    Others I suspect will come to different decisions based on their own usage patterns - basically, there is no one size fits all.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 49
    progmacprogmac Posts: 1,850member
    thanks for this thread, guys. it reminds me why AI is a nice place to hang around, where people don't flip their lids every time someone asks a question that has been answered, but treat each other with respect (generally, though even I am guilty of an infraction here and there).



    speaking for myself, i've never really been able to tell the difference in 5400 vs. 7200 drives in day to day stuff, but i'm not a very intensive user usually, either
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 49
    Isn't density a factor? That is, a 120GB drive is faster than a 60GB one, all other things being equal because the data is more tightly packed and therefore the drive can make more use of potential bandwidth.



    I would go for the 120GB 5400RPM drive over the 100GB 7200 rpm drive; the faster spinning drive will only be a little faster than the larger one -- not nearly the margin it would hold over a 100GB 5400RPM drive.



    I recall when the GHz TiBook first came out that the 60GB 4200RPM drives were quite substantially faster than 40GB drives at the same speed.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 49
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Interesting thinking...



    I didn't think about the partial improvement in speed when upgrading from the 100 GB to 120 GB 5400 RPM drive. It should be about the same power and noise, just a bit faster due to the increased density of the platters.



    Perhaps a good compromise between performance and battery life?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.