Hitachi Deskstar T7K500



+ Add a Comment




Author: "These results were slightly curious to us..."

Yeah, they're pretty "CURIOUS" to me too.

I don't know how MaxPC got the results they did, but's results sure tell a different story about this drive.

If you want an education about benchmarking hard drives, start here:

SR's testing methodolgy is probably the most fastidious and well-designed anywhere, and they are widely regarded as the most authoritative hdd review site on the Internet.

Google 'hard drive review' and see what comes up first...

According to SR's "High-End DriveMark 2006" the T7K500 is the _BEST_ performing 7.2k rpm drive tested.


First place: Hitachi T7K500
Second place: Hitachi 7K500
Tied for third place: WD4000YR and WD4000KD
The first Samsung shows up in ninth.

(I'm excluding 10k and 15k rpm drives here, and duplications due to testing drives w/ and w/o NCQ.)

In "Office DriveMark 2006" the Hitachi T7K500 is beaten only by Hitachi's own 7K500, and by a margin of less than 1 percent.

The IO/S score turned out by the T7K500 in "High-End DriveMark 2006" beats the WD's by 9.5 percent, and the highest scoring Samsung by 24.5 percent!

I'm don't mean to bash MaxPC in general, (I get their mag in the mail every month) but this article just plain sucks.

Not just the erroneous benchmarks, but also the tone of the article sounds like the author has an agenda. For example, the author states the drive is 'unremarkable, and more than that, it's an under-performer.' As if he's just enumerated TWO problems and not one. Since when are hard drives "remarkable" aside from their performance?

Another example: saying that the WD and Samsung "utterly destroy the Hitachi" by turning out benchmark results that are 9 percent better (results that are almost undoubtedly flawed). I'd reserve the phrase "utterly destroyed" for the Samsung getting beaten in a legit benchmark by 24.5 percent.

Maybe MaxPC should get their hands on another sample and run their tests again.

But maybe first they should go read SR's pages on hdd benchmarking so they can report something more useful than the 'utterly meaningless' sequential read figures that were probably used in this lame article.




Just an observation... the Burst Speed listed for the Hitachi is quite slow for a SATAII drive, is it possible that the drive is factory set to SATA1 mode even though it may be capable of faster opperation??? I know my very first SATA2 drive was pre-set at the factory for SATA1 opperation due to potential for trouble if ran in SATA2 mode on a SATA1 motherboard. Thus they required you to download a utility to manually set the drive to SATA2 mode.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.