Quick Review --WesternDigital 500GB Vs Samsung 250GB F1

[Muradd9]

Today I Benchmark the New Western Digital 500GB WD5000AACS HDD and compared it with my samsung 250GB F1.
The result is interesting. lets start....

//Today i called Computer source and they said
WD 250GB =3450Taka only.//

Samsung 250GB Price=3450Taka

WD 500GB Price=5000 Taka
(Rishit computer IBD)


Benchmark software SiSoftware Sandra Lite 2007

*Samsung

Capacity : 233GB
General Capabilities
Channel : Master
Type : ATA
Removable : No
Model : SAMSUNG HD252HJ
Revision : 1AC01109
Serial Number : S17HJDWQ303644
ATA/ATAPI Approved Version : 7.82
Disk Cache : Multi-Sector with Read Cache
Cache Size : 16MB

Power rating=(12V+5V)=10 watt

*Western Digital

Capacity : 466GB
General Capabilities
Channel : Master
Type : ATA
Removable : No
Model : WDC WD5000AACS-00ZUB0
Revision : 01.01B01
Serial Number : WD-WCASU6754264
ATA/ATAPI Approved Version : 8.00
Cache Size : 16MB

Power rating=(12V+5V)=10 watt


Quick result

SAMSUNG HD252HJ 250GB F1 SATA

1.Benchmark Results

Drive Index : 81 MB/s
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Random Access Time : 7 ms
Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.

Performance Test Status
Run ID : MURAD on Monday, February 02, 2009 at 7:39:45 PM

Benchmark Breakdown
Buffered Read : 236 MB/s
Sequential Read : 95 MB/s
Random Read : 57 MB/s
Buffered Write : 122 MB/s
Sequential Write : 96 MB/s
Random Write : 66 MB/s
Random Access Time : 7 ms (estimated)

Drive
Drive Type : Hard Disk
Total Size : 14GB
Free Space : 9.2GB, 66%
Cluster Size : 4kB

2.Benchmark Results Drive C (66% free)

Drive Index : 88 MB/s
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Random Access Time : 13 ms
Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.



WD5000AACS 500GB SATA

1.Benchmark Results

Drive Index : 67 MB/s
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Random Access Time : 7 ms
Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.

Performance Test Status
Run ID : MURAD on Monday, February 02, 2009 at 7:42:35 PM

Benchmark Breakdown
Buffered Read : 206 MB/s
Sequential Read : 77 MB/s
Random Read : 49 MB/s
Buffered Write : 196 MB/s
Sequential Write : 77 MB/s
Random Write : 59 MB/s
Random Access Time : 7 ms (estimated)

Drive
Drive Type : Hard Disk
Total Size : 16GB
Free Space : 16GB, 100%
Cluster Size : 4kB

2.Benchmark Results -Drive C (100% free)

Drive Index : 76 MB/s
Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better.
Random Access Time : 5 ms
Results Interpretation : Lower index values are better.


Samsung wins every test excepts the following tests
The Score of samsung
Samsung
Buffered Write : 122 MB/s
(Disk:Random Access Time : 7 ms)
Drive C:Random Access Time : 13 ms(*Free Space : 9.2GB, 66%)

WD
DisKBuffered Write : 196 MB/s
(Disk:Random Access Time : 7 ms)
Drive C:Random Access Time : 5 ms(*Free Space : 16GB, 100%)

Buffered Write is less important than Sequential Write and Random Write.
C drive of samsung disk was 34%full and it is the Operating system drive.
That`s why the random access time for drive c is high but the Total Disk random access time is same
Lower random access time is better for smaller file. Higher Read Write speed is better for large file like song video Disk image.

Conclusion:

The performance of WD5000AACS 500GB is good.But Samsung 250GB F1 is better than WD5000AACS 500GB(performance).
I wish if anyone have WD 250GB HDD and/or 500GB samsung HDD please post here some benchmark(SiSoftware Sandra Lite 2007or other) and this will help us to find good hdd in same price range.


Thanks Tarek vai for the WD Hdd and all of u for read this review.
Feel free too comment.

Detail Benchmark : See attachment.
*The all Hdd picture(All Pic.zip and Benchmark picture(Benchmark_Pic.zip) and benchmark result(Benchmark_file.zip) are below.

[Muradd9]

All Picture Here.

[Mazhar]

samsung's F1 line is their fastest desktop variants, if it must be compared to a similar Western Digital drive, it has to be the Western Digital black edition drives, which are faster...

even the WD's with the newer, bigger platters nd reconstructed cache alocation should perform similarly (the ones with part numbers ending with aaks)

but good review nontheless

edit: also, western digital tends to do worse in synthetic benchmarks, but better in actual applications

[Muradd9]

Wd hdd with ending Part number aaks r very good .

We need to compare similar priced model .
I need Better price/performance model.
Samsung F1 series r cheap in bangladesh that`s why i need to compare it with similarly priced WD HDD.
The price of WD34GB raptor is 10k in bangladesh.
Western Digital black edition(500/640GB) drives will cost more than samsung500/640GB in bangladesh.

I will be happy to see how 250GB wd performs against 250GB Samsung . They r both priced 3450Taka.