Original Link: https://www.anandtech.com/show/22
IDE drives (more properly called ATA drives) have come a long way since they were first introduced in 1985 as a replacement for the ST-506/412 interface. Today, one can find 512k buffers, 5400 RPM speeds, sub 10ms seek times, and the much ballyhooed UltraATA 33 MB/sec transfer rate. We also stand before yet another advance; Seagate’s latest Medalist Pro and IBM’s Deskstar 14GXP promise 7200 RPM rotation speeds. As is often the case though, higher figures in popularly quoted specs don’t always seem to correlate to better benchmark figures. Although there are some 8 GB drives available and many > 8 GB products have been announced, the 6.4 GB capacity is the highest at which every major manufacturer is currently shipping at least one drive.
Initially we began testing these drives using Intel’s PIIX v3.01 Bus Mastering Drivers. After the initial benchmarking was completed, however, we found, as have many others, that the default drivers in Windows 95 OEM Service Release 2 provide better performance with DMA enabled.
For this test, we used an ABIT LX6 motherboard (v1.1, bios v C7Q), a 266 MHz Intel Pentium II processor, a 64MB 10ns SDRAM DIMM, and a Matrox Millennium II PCI 4MB (bios v1.2, PowerDesk v3.80).
A notable omission in this review is Quantum’s Bigfoot TX 6.4GB unit. The 5.25" form-factor Bigfoot is positioned as an low-cost alternative to traditional 3.5" low-profile drives. The Bigfoot is not intended to be a high-performance drive, however, and lags significantly behind 3.5" drives in performance.
The Bigfoot is the drive most commonly found in major retail-brand systems such as Compaq and Hewlett-Packard. Expect a review of the Quantum Bigfoot on Anand Tech Affiliate: The Storage Review in the near future.
The boot drive (Western Digital Caviar AC31600) contained Windows 95 OSR 2.1 patched with Intel’s 82371xB INF Update and Microsoft’s REMIDEUP.EXE fix. The test drive in question was the sole device located on the secondary controller built into the motherboard. The drive’s DMA box under System Properties’ Device Manager was checked. The tests were run at 1024x768 with 24 bit color at 85 Hz using small fonts. ZDBop’s Startup Manager was used to prevent loading of background applications. ZDBop’s WinBench 98 v1.0’s Disk Test Suites were run on all test drives.
|
Fujitsu is not as well-known a hard drive name as some of
the others featured in this review… we were very eager to test the MPB3064AT in hopes
of finding a diamond-in-the-rough. The drive sports an >10ms seek time, 5400 RPM
rotational speed and a 256k buffer, all par for the course in this roundup. Unfortunately,
we were ultimately disappointed with the numbers that the drive posted. In both the
Business and High-End Disk WinMarks, the Fujitsu was at the bottom of the charts. The
drive isn’t sold by many vendors, but those that do sell it have attractive prices on
it. Nevertheless, this drive cannot be recommended.
|
|
IBM, still the largest computer corporation today, is not commonly-known for its hard drives. When one thinks of ATA drives, the Maxtor and Western Digital models that one sees at major retail outlets are what come to mind. Even so, IBMs Deskstar 5 took top honors in both the Business and High-End Disk WinMarks. Despite its high speed, the drive was astonishingly quiet, operating unobtrusively in the background with little noise. There are some reports that the Deskstar does not run properly in overclocked systems with bus speeds and 75 or 83 MHz; we informally used the unit on an ABIT LX6 and FIC PA-2007, both clocked at 75 MHz, with no problems. The IBM is a little pricey when compared to the competition, though not prohibitively so. Top performance garners the Deskstar 5 this roundups performance recommendation.
|
|
Maxtor, unlike many of the other drives in this roundup,
enjoys a strong retail presence. One can walk into any CompUSA or Best Buy, for example,
and see, along with Western Digital, Maxtor DiamondMax drives in many different sizes.
Common perception among retail consumers is that of the two brands, Western Digital always
provides superior performance at a higher price. We were thus pleasantly surprised to find
that the DiamondMax bested the Caviar in almost every major performance category. The
drive also operates considerably quieter than the Western Digital offering. When combined
with a typically lower price, the decision becomes clear: Of the drives one commonly finds
in retail stores, the Maxtor is the better buy.
|
|
Though it does not enjoy as significant a retail presence
as Maxtor and Western Digital, Quantum drives are quite often found as the stock unit in
retail systems. Quantum has two offerings in the 6.4 GB Ultra ATA range, the
performance-oriented Fireball SE along the value-oriented Bigfoot TX (see sidebar).
Despite a relatively low 128kb buffer size, the Fireball SE trailed only IBM’s
Deskstar 5 in performance, edging out Maxtor’s DiamondMax to finish second in both
the Business and High-End Disk WinMarks. The Fireball is also very reasonably priced
through mail-order, OEM packaging. Above-average performance along with competitive
pricing make the Quantum Fireball SE an easy value recommendation.
|
|
In some ways, Seagate’s Medalist Pro is similar to
Quantum’s Fireball SE. Although a recognized name, Seagate does not have a strong
retail presence. Like the Fireball, the Medalist Pro is competitively priced. In some
ways, the Medalist Pro is very different from the Fireball SE. Instead of the paltry 128k
buffer, for example, it offers an ATA-hefty 512k. And, unlike the Fireball, the Medalist
Pro disappoints with substandard performance. The drive finished close to the bottom of
the pack, ahead of only the last-place Fujitsu drive. The ST36451A is apparently being
phased out in favor of the promising 7200rpm Medalist Pro series. Seagate’s current
offering, though, cannot be recommended.
|
|
The Western Digital Caviar drive series enjoys both wide
retail distribution along with a stellar retail reputation. Western Digital prides itself
on being the "world’s most recommended hard drive." However, middling
performance and noisy operation combine to preclude Storage Review from joining the rest
of the world. If ATA performance is one’s goal IBM’s Deskstar 5 outdistances the
Caviar by a significant margin, albeit at an increase in cost. Quantum’s Fireball SE,
although harder to find, offers better performance for less money. Maxtor’s
DiamondMax, the retail twin of the Caviar, can be just as easily obtained, usually costs a
bit less, and provides slightly better performance. The most notable trait of the Caviar
was the noise the actuator/head assembly made when seeking; it was substantially louder
than every other drive in this roundup. All in all, the Caviar delivers mediocre
performance at a rather high price, and thus is not recommended.
|
Log in
Don't have an account? Sign up now
Ziff Davis Winbench 98 |
||||
WinMark (higher is better) | Disk/Read (lower is better) | |||
Business (KB/s) |
High
End (KB/s) |
Random
Access (ms) |
CPU
Utilization (%) |
|
Fujitsu MPB3064AT | 1098 | 3366 | 16.6 | 6.7 |
IBM Deskstar 5 DHEA 36480 | 1362 | 3910 | 15.0 | 5.2 |
Maxtor DiamondMax 86480D6 | 1234 | 3552 | 17.6 | 5.3 |
Quantum Fireball SE QM36400SE-A | 1254 | 3722 | 16.3 | 5.9 |
Seagate Medalist Pro ST36451A | 1210 | 3498 | 16.7 | 4.0 |
Western Digital Caviar WDAC36400 | 1218 | 3532 | 15.0 | 5.2 |