Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ATPTourFan · Mar 29, 2004, 02:27 AM

I currently have an old, out of warranty, noisy, but OK IBM TravelStar 5400rpm 60GB drive with 2MB cache in my 667MHz Gigabit Ethernet TiBook.

I'm considering getting a new 60GB drive and retiring the old TravelStar to backup duties. Storage is cheap these days and I'm looking to squeeze all the life out of this PowerBook that is still under 3yr AppleCare. A 1GB RAM maximizing is also close on the RADAR.

My question: with very similar pricing (which I don't want as a discussion topic here), which drive is better overall? The Hitachi TravelStar 5K80 60GB or the Toshiba MK6022GAX 60GB?

Both drives have 60GB capacity and a 5400rpm mechanism along with fluid dynamic bearings for relatively quiet operation. The TravelStar has 8MB built-in cache and the Toshiba has 16MB cache built-in.

TravelStars have always had a very good G-shock rating. Both have a 200/800 operational/non-operational shock rating.

Power consumption is almost identical with the only difference being in average seek power. The Toshiba is 2.9W and the Hitachi is 2.6W leading me to believe that Hitachi just has a more efficient arm. I don't know how much that would affect my battery life.

The most obvious difference is cache as I mentioned. Toshiba offers 16MB vs Hitachi's 8MB. What might this mean in real-world performance?

Discuss!! I'd appreciate any insights/experience you have. Thanks!

ATPTourFan · Mar 29, 2004, 12:32 PM

So nobody has either one of those drives? Can anyone comment on the difference in cache?

Where's the best place you've found to buy 2.5" HDDs?

yoyoman · Mar 29, 2004, 01:43 PM

bench mark wise the 16mb is marketing. You don't need 16mb for such a small hd it would never use all 16mb of cache. Pluse bench mark wise showed the other one was a tad faster.

ATPTourFan · Mar 29, 2004, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by yoyoman:
bench mark wise the 16mb is marketing. You don't need 16mb for such a small hd it would never use all 16mb of cache. Pluse bench mark wise showed the other one was a tad faster.

That's what I figured since the newest Hitachi TravelStars have 8MB caches.

Any idea about the acoustics?

I'm pretty sure I want to go with one of the TravelStars, and the more I read about the 7200rpm 60GB model, the more I think that's what's going into my TiBook.

yoyoman · Mar 30, 2004, 10:03 PM

or the 80 gig 7200 rpm 8mb cache one. Im ordering that one this week. I hope to get it less than 4 weeks.

ATPTourFan · Apr 1, 2004, 01:26 AM

Originally posted by yoyoman:
or the 80 gig 7200 rpm 8mb cache one. Im ordering that one this week. I hope to get it less than 4 weeks.

I went with the TravelStar 60GB 7200rpm. After having only IBM TravelStar drives in my PowerBooks (at least when I had a choice), the brand and their reputation means a lot to me.

I also got 1GB RAM from TransIntl as well. I figure between the new HDD and the maxed out RAM, my PowerBook G4 (Gigabit Ethernet) 667MHz will definitely last me to the PowerBook G5s.

Paul Huang · Apr 1, 2004, 01:32 AM

I have the 60GB 5,400 RPM/2MB cache IBM TravelStar drive. I am not sure about the 2MB cache thing, but it's got to be. I took delivery of _another_ Titanium with 1GHz (same) and 1GB of RAM. The stock 60GB Fujitsu 4,200 RPM, 2MB cache drive was at least 15% faster than the IBM drive. What accounts for the difference? The data density. The IBM 5,400 RPM/2MB drive is 12.5mm (three platters). The Fujitsu has two platters, so the density of it is 50% higher, therefore offers a higher relative speed.

The Toshsiba 60GB/16MB cache drive is faster in my side-by-side test compared to a 60GB/4,200/2MB. 15% is nothing to sneeze at. I typically don't use a stopwatch, because when you put two identical systems next to each other, the difference is clear.

Regardless, I am going to go to 7,200 RPM/8MB drive, but 80GB, as soon as it becomes available.

ATPTourFan · Apr 1, 2004, 01:58 AM

Paul, that's the TravelStar I currently have which is now making some intermittant knocking sounds... the obvious sign of decay.

I agree, the 12.5mm tall 60GB 5400rpm TravelStar model 60GH was an icon of size and speed at the time it was released, but areal densities have improved dramatically. The 60GB 7200 rpm drive I just ordered only has 2 platters and 4 heads and a (max) areal density of 50GB/square inch. Compare that to my current dying TravelStar which in its 12.5mm height has a whopping 4 platters and 8 read heads!! Its maximum areal density is only 28GB/square inch.

Latencies are obviously much better in the new 7K60 at 4.2ms vs. 5.5ms. Average seek time is 10ms vs. 1ms.

What's really pleasing is that this new drive uses less wattage with the exception of power-on. In Mac OS X, the drive will rarely spin down anyway because something is always writing to the disk, so that's great news.

I'm getting the RAM and new disk when the UPS truck swings by. I'm planning on using Carbon Copy Cloner to move my data over. The dying 60GH is going into my FW400 powered enclosure for backup duties.

Anyone want my original two 256MB PC133 SO-DIMMs?? I'm not going to need them later today.

Paul Huang · Apr 1, 2004, 02:02 AM

I am going to install a 7,200 in one of the PB next week. It's going to bring at least 25%-40% performance bump. For my daily PB, I can't afford to take it off-line. I will wait until 10.4 is released and make the swap at the same time, or better yet, PB G5.

ATPTourFan · Apr 1, 2004, 02:07 AM

Why is it such a big deal to install a new drive in your PowerBook? I guess it could be difficult if you don't have a FW enclosure, but then again, you have two PowerBooks. I'd just remove BOTH drives and use the second PB as your "FW enclosure". Start up PB #2 in Target Disk Mode and Carbon Copy Clone. Then re-install your other drive back into the PowerBook #2.

It can't take too long... is your PowerBook an on-demand server??