Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Seagate Barracuda 2TB ST2000DM001

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,306

    Default Seagate Barracuda 2TB ST2000DM001

    Phoronix: Seagate Barracuda 2TB ST2000DM001

    The Seagate ST2000DM001 is a two terabyte Serial ATA 3.0 hard drive that retails for less than $90 USD and is the subject of this weekend's benchmarks at Phoronix.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20011

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    18

    Default There are different versions of this drive

    Looks like you got the 3 667GB platter version instead of the 2 1TB platter version, which is faster and quieter.

    Here's some info: http://www.techenclave.com/community...-sizes.138435/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andrebrait View Post
    Looks like you got the 3 667GB platter version instead of the 2 1TB platter version, which is faster and quieter.

    Here's some info: http://www.techenclave.com/community...-sizes.138435/
    My mistake. Yours is the 1TB platter version, in which case I don't know why it's slow. It should be blazing fast.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andrebrait View Post
    My mistake. Yours is the 1TB platter version, in which case I don't know why it's slow. It should be blazing fast.
    I don't know the details of how each test works, but generally speaking with HDDs, a higher capacity means slower seek times but faster read times. The speed you're expecting could be failing due to random reads/writes.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Old Europe
    Posts
    904

    Default

    Also, you can check if you have the newest firmware installed.
    I bought this HDD more then a year ago (don't know about platter configuration).

    When I used smartctl recently, it told me that a firmware update is available for this device.*
    And indeed, there where quite a few firmware revision between the one installed and the
    newest one available on their website. Not sure if it helps, concerning the performance.
    At least Seagate rates the update(s) as "Important".

    The firmware updates are provided as *.exe and *.iso files, so even the ones using
    Linux exclusively should be able to update the disks easily.

    [*] This is actually quite a nice feature of smartctl, that I didn't know about.
    smartctl even provided the links to the download page.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropy View Post
    The firmware updates are provided as *.exe and *.iso files, so even the ones using
    Linux exclusively should be able to update the disks easily.
    Yeah, it's pretty handy (smartctl). I tried to update my firmware using the ISO a while back, and it couldn't detect my drive. I changed some options in my firmware (uEFI), I think enabling BIOS compatibility and switching the drive mode to IDE, and it was able to detect the drive then, but it thought it was the wrong model (maybe it was, but it looked like the right one...).

    I might try again later. :/

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Not that it matters, but bigger size only means that you will have more lost data, because seagate is number one in bad hdds.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by startzz View Post
    Not that it matters, but bigger size only means that you will have more lost data, because seagate is number one in bad hdds.
    Do you have a source for that please? Everything I've read up to now suggests that there is simply insufficient evidence to draw such wide generalizations about the competing manufacturers, which makes me skeptical of your comment. However, if you do have solid, non-anecdotal evidence to show, I will stand corrected, and happily at that. Such information would be very useful.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Apparently I'm not the only one (same exact model, too). Well, as long as it doesn't die catastrophically like the 500GB Hitachi I had in my laptop (now replaced by a 128GB SSD), I'll be happy.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Serge View Post
    Do you have a source for that please? Everything I've read up to now suggests that there is simply insufficient evidence to draw such wide generalizations about the competing manufacturers, which makes me skeptical of your comment. However, if you do have solid, non-anecdotal evidence to show, I will stand corrected, and happily at that. Such information would be very useful.
    there's this at least:

    http://blog.backblaze.com/2014/01/21...-should-i-buy/

    personally i lost a 3tb seagate disk after 6 months. but i'm still ok using them in raid. i'm using 3x3tb seagates in raidz. pretty good performance wise. i also have a 2tb disk as scratch space etc.. but mostly use ssd now.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •