Maxtor 160GB IDE Versus Western Digital 160GB IDE

vbimport

#1

Hello,

I need to purchase a new 160GB Hard drive IDE not serial ATA and I am really confused about those two Maxtor and Western Digital.

which one is more reliable, faster and better?

I understand that Maxtor may be faster/better than western and the other way around for different storage space…so what about
160GB?

Also does anyone know of sites where they show benchmarks
and tests between those 2 hard drives for the 160GB range, I came across Tom’s Hardware but that talked about the Maxtor 250GB IDE Versus Western Digital 250GB IDE, not the 160GB.

any advantages/disadvantages you know of …

please provide your input, I need all of your profissional opinions.

Thanks.


#2

I used to go with Maxtor. But after they changed warranty-policies to one year, they are having some reliability problems. 2 of my Maxtor disks died after about 3 months. I could RMA them and I was very happy they didn’t contain much valuable information.
My Western Digital disks are running smooth for about 1,5 year now.
So I left Maxtor and only buy Western Digital.
But I can imagine that everybody here has his own experience and they might be different.

I doubt you’ll notice a difference in speed in anything but benchmarks.


#3

I always preferred WD for their great customer care support and I never had problems with their drives. Maxtor are also good but WD is my preferred #1 choice.


#4

I’ve had a Seagate 4GB drive for what is it, coming onto 6 years now? Very happy. Seagate drives are good too.


#5

Originally posted by $CyBeRwIz$
I’ve had a Seagate 4GB drive for what is it, coming onto 6 years now? Very happy. Seagate drives are good too.

But that’s not what he asked! :wink:

I would go for WD. Had a bad experience with Maxtor, but there will be people who have just the opposite experience.

If I where you I would go for the cheapest!!


#6

Originally posted by Namoh
[B]But that’s not what he asked! :wink:

I would go for WD. Had a bad experience with Maxtor, but there will be people who have just the opposite experience.

If I where you I would go for the cheapest!! [/B]

I just thought i’d put that brand into the equasion… :smiley:


#7

Sorry to burst yer bubble, but I had 3 very bad experiences with Seagate, as far as compatibility and stability. And aside the barracuda models, they are loud drives.


#8

Originally posted by xtacydima
Sorry to burst yer bubble, but I had 3 very bad experiences with Seagate, as far as compatibility and stability. And aside the barracuda models, they are loud drives.

Ah geez… just burst my bubble… but seriously, I had a WD drive that died after 2 weeks, so that kinda turned me off WD for a while(if not forever)


#9

Well Thanks everyone for your input, I have ordered a Maxtor 160GB IDE, and I was told that the waranty would go for three years.

If anything happens to the drive in the first year, I would deal directly with the shop I bought it from otherwise I would deal with another place…

I have heard good stuff about WD but I went for maxtor simply because I had a 17 GB for 5 years now without any problems till now.

I am not sure if this is true or not but I heard WD were a little noiser than Maxtor…

Also not sure but I think I’ve read somewhere that the Maxtor is a little thiner than WD!!.

I hope I made the right decision anyway.

Thanks.


#10

Originally posted by Analyzer_x
[B]Well Thanks everyone for your input, I have ordered a Maxtor 160GB IDE, and I was told that the waranty would go for three years.

If anything happens to the drive in the first year, I would deal directly with the shop I bought it from otherwise I would deal with another place…

I have heard good stuff about WD but I went for maxtor simply because I had a 17 GB for 5 years now without any problems till now.

I am not sure if this is true or not but I heard WD were a little noiser than Maxtor…

Also not sure but I think I’ve read somewhere that the Maxtor is a little thiner than WD!!.

I hope I made the right decision anyway.

Thanks. [/B]

Good luck with your purchase! :smiley:


#11

Good choice. I just got the 120g Maxtor and it seems very good.


#12

Not to throw another brand in the mix, but I’ve had problems with Maxtor and Western Digital. IBM / Hitachi drives are supposedly the most reliable (for IDE anyway). They are usually 3-6 months behind WD and Maxtor when new capacities come out, but I think its worth it. Seagate has also made enormous strides in improving the noise level and performance of their drives. I had a Seagate 120Mb drive that was bulletproof. After it was “retired”, I dropped it on the ground numerous times and left it unprotected in a shoe box for a few years. Two year ago, I took it out for sh1ts and giggles and plugged it into my machine. It worked perfectly (albeit superslow – PIO mode 1).


#13

I used to like WD (circa 1990’s), but every one that I own has a minimum of one RMA, some have been RMA’ed three times.

I’ve own two 40GB Maxtors that have been HW mirrored for about 3-4 years now without a problem.

I just bought my gf a 160GB Maxtor, 8mb cache, 7200rpm IDE HDD for Christmas 2003, partitioned it into 60/100GB and installed XP - No problems.

It always seems the quality of HDD’s shift from mfg to mfg every 8 to 10 years. Seagate, WD, Maxtor, IBM, etc.

Support/warranty policys have been changing even faster.


#14

ok here is another question…

I just recieved the 160GB Maxtor, 8mb cache, 7200rpm IDE HDD

I am using it for data storage, not running any OS on it, so I made
it a slave.

The first time I booted to my OS windows 2003 server after connecting the drive, windows detected the whole 160GB drive unpartitioned unformated, so I asked it to partition it and format it for me, but it only created a 152.7GB

is it possible to make windows partition the 160 GB drive it as a single drive with the full capacity since I am not putting an operating system on it.

Also another thing… after I saw that it only partitioned the drive
as 152.7GB, I deleted the partition but when I restarted windows
it no longer detected it as 160GB drive but as 152.7GB before I partition it… how can I fix this and force windows to detect (not partition but at least detect) the drive as 160GB not 152.7GB like the first time, I need to be able to do this so in case if I have to split it into 2 partitions to use the drive with full capacity I can.

is there a good software that I can even use even from dos that will allow me to partition and format the drive with full capacity + NTFS Support ofcourse.

I have Acronis PartitionExpert but that also now detects the drive as 152.7GB…

Thanks


#15

I believe there is a setting you have to enable within XP/2K3 for drives (or more specifically partitions) larger than 130GB. Might want to google for it or check out M$ website.

Maxtor has a utility that may help: http://www.maxtor.com/en/support/downloads/maxblast3.htm

Check out http://www.knoppix.net/ too, you can have a fully functional linux system that boots from the cdrom without ever needing a hdd.

I mention it because it has (as does all linux) some wonderful utilities for hdd’s, boot managers, etc. Great recovery tools too.

It also gives you an opportunity to try out linux without having to install anything.


#16

SATA maxtor is 3 years warranty. I don’t know about the new ATA drives.

But one thing is for sure WD is 1 year warranty in the EU and 3 years in the USA. So I say fuck them bitches :slight_smile:

There are no bad drives (except IBM’s) so I chose for the brand that gives the longest warranty.

I got:
2 x 120 gb sata maxtor
2 x 80 gb ATA maxtor
1 x 60 gb IBM (+ 1 in my other PC. The 2 hd’s broke 4 times.)
1 x 200 GB WD (I didn’t know about the 1 year warranty in the EU)
1 x 160 gb seagate


#17

Analyzer_x

To answer your question about your 160GB drive… You don’t have a problem w/ your drive or partitioning software my friend. See this is where drive mfg are not in sync w/ the computer industry… And they tend to screw us out of a few bytes b/c of their proprietary nomenclature and definition of the basic term ‘bytes’. The only problem is the larger the drive, the more space you ‘think’ you’ve lost or get cheated out of…

One KB to most of the computer industry is calculated as 1024 bytes. One MB therefore would then be 1,048,576 Bytes, right?
So 160GB would be 160 x 1024^3 (1073741824) or 171,798,691,840 bytes. Well most ALL drive mfg’s (Seagate, WD, Maxtor, and IBM) think of one KB as exactly 1000 bytes, 1 MB as exactly 1,000,000 bytes and 1GB as exactly 1,000,000,000 bytes. So 160GB is really 160 billion “bytes” by their definition of the word, or 160,000,000,000 bytes.

But all versions of Windows calculate all KB, MB and GB by dividing by 1024 instead of 1000. So if you take your 152.7GB reported to you by Windows and your partitioning software, multiplying it by 1024, you get 156364.8 MB. If you then multiply that by 1024 again, you will get 160117555.2 KB …once more by 1024 and you get 163960376524.8 bytes.

So you DO have a 160GB drive by their standards. But really, by normal computing standards you sorta get cheated out of 7838315315.2 bytes, or 7.3GB. But there’s nothing anyone can really do about it b/c the drive mfg’s have been doing this for many years…They are simply not on the same page as the rest of the computer industry. Oh well, Hope I didn’t bust your bubble either too much, but thats the way the ball bounces… :slight_smile:

As for which drive is best, I myself generally prefer WD drives b/c of their warranties, support, and overall reliability, at least in my experience anyway. But Maxtors are good drives too and I own 2 of those…In fact I just bought a 120GB Maxtor just last weekend (well actually Windows reports 114GB)…but its performing flawlessly so far.

In conclusion, You don’t need any special software…Your drive is working perfectly under NTFS…Its just the drive mfg does not define a KB as 1024 bytes like the rest of the world. Hope this helps clear things up a bit… Good luck and happy computing! : )

Peace,
NC2


#18

Analyzer_x

To answer your question about your 160GB drive… You don’t have a problem w/ your drive or partitioning software my friend. See this is where drive mfg are not in sync w/ the computer industry… And they tend to screw us out of a few bytes b/c of their proprietary nomenclature and definition of the basic term ‘bytes’. The only problem is the larger the drive, the more space you ‘think’ you’ve lost or get cheated out of…

One KB to most of the computer industry is calculated as 1024 bytes. One MB therefore would then be 1,048,576 Bytes, right?
So 160GB would be 160 x 1024^3 (1073741824) or 171,798,691,840 bytes. Well most ALL drive mfg’s (Seagate, WD, Maxtor, and IBM) think of one KB as exactly 1000 bytes, 1 MB as exactly 1,000,000 bytes and 1GB as exactly 1,000,000,000 bytes. So 160GB is really 160 billion “bytes” by their definition of the word, or 160,000,000,000 bytes.

But all versions of Windows calculate all KB, MB and GB by dividing by 1024 instead of 1000. So if you take your 152.7GB reported to you by Windows and your partitioning software, multiplying it by 1024, you get 156364.8 MB. If you then multiply that by 1024 again, you will get 160117555.2 KB …once more by 1024 and you get 163960376524.8 bytes.

So you DO have a 160GB drive by their standards. But really, by normal computing standards you sorta get cheated out of 7838315315.2 bytes, or 7.3GB. But there’s nothing anyone can really do about it b/c the drive mfg’s have been doing this for many years…They are simply not on the same page as the rest of the computer industry. Oh well, Hope I didn’t bust your bubble either too much, but thats the way the ball bounces… :slight_smile:

As for which drive is best, I myself generally prefer WD drives b/c of their warranties, support, and overall reliability, at least in my experience anyway. But Maxtors are good drives too and I own 2 of those…In fact I just bought a 120GB Maxtor just last weekend (well actually Windows reports 114GB)…but its performing flawlessly so far.

In conclusion, You don’t need any special software…Your drive is working perfectly under NTFS…Its just the drive mfg does not define a KB as 1024 bytes like the rest of the world. Hope this helps clear things up a bit… Good luck and happy computing! : )

Peace,
NC2


#19

Jymmm, thanks for the links, I had already downloaded the Maxtor tools and used them.

Knoppix is really cool I am getting a copy now, sounds simillar to Windows Preinstalled Environment
http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder/

are there other ISO images of linux like Knoppix where I can run it from the CD?

I am aware that you can get more space allocated when the drive
gets partitioned under linux.

[B]Jymmm:-

I just bought my gf a 160GB Maxtor, 8mb cache, 7200rpm IDE HDD for Christmas 2003, partitioned it into 60/100GB and installed XP - No problems.

[/B]

just woundering what is the actual space allocated for each partition can you please let me know?

==============================================

netcruiser2, thank you for your detailed reply, really well explaind too and sure I understand now that I can’t use the full capacity of the drive under windows, however I still feel a little confused about somthing.

part of my previous question was regarding how the first time I connected the drive to windows, then I did the following:-

Administrative tools–> Computer Managment—> Disk Managment
then I noticed the drive was detected as 160GB unpartitioned, unformatted… but it would only let me partition it as 152.77 GB so I did partition it as 152.77GB.

All I am really woundering about is how I can get windows to re-detect the drive again as 160GB, unpartitioned, unformatted?

the reason I am asking this is because when I noticed that the first time I partitioned the drive to 152.77GB and not 160GB I decided to use the Maxtor tools from dos to re-partition and re-format the drive thinking this will actually get it up to 160GB. instead when I opened windows the second time, the drive for some reason was detected as 152.00GB instead of 152.77GB and I could only partition it as 152.00.

Thanks for help.


#20

Actually, the drive is 160 GB. The lost space on the drive has more to do with the partition overhead. Any time you partition a drive that big, you lose about 8 GB space. If you were to try rerunning windows setup, you would see a partion with 152 GB, and 8 GB unpartitioned. It is that way with all drives, and has nothing to do with you getting cheated out of space by the manufacturers. The drive has to store the partition information somewhere.

Maxtor has about the best software on the market for its harddrives. Even an Iso of Maxblaster to burn directly to cd. It works for all your harddrives if you have a maxtor drive in the computer, so you can copy operating system and all to another drive, partition all your drives and many other neat, nice to have utilities.

WD and Hitachi dont offer this type of service, even if they are great drives too. I have a Maxtor 80GB drive, and a Hitachi/ibm 160GB SATA drive. Used Maxblaster to setup both of em.

By the way, my Hitachi drive states it is 164.7 GBs, and the Maxtor 160 GB drive probably states on the drive itself that it is about the same size. If the 1000 MB = 1 GB theory was the reason that he lost 8 GB, then he would have more than 152 in the end. Less than 160, but more than 152.