iMac 3TB HDD is slower than 1TB

[barefeats]

Just tested both with QuickBench 4.04.

Large 1TB Sequential Custom Test (average of 5 iterations):
1TB = 208MB/s READ, 207MB/s WRITE
3TB = 174MB/s READ, 173MB/s WRITE

Also faster on small random writes:
1TB = 57MB/s
3TB = 38MB/s

Tested two 3TB in case it was a dud. No dud. Just slower.

Not a huge deal but just thought you would like to know.

P.S. Those are not Fusion Drives -- just the regular HDDs.

[MeFromHere]

There have been indications that Apple is using more than one disk vendor in each system type. Can you post the model numbers of the particular drives you tested?

Thanks.

[barefeats]

Originally Posted by MeFromHere

There have been indications that Apple is using more than one disk vendor in each system type. Can you post the model numbers of the particular drives you tested?

Thanks.

Yes.

1TB = model ST1000DM003 (Seagate Barracuda 7200.14)

3TB = model ST3000DM001 (Seagate Barracuda 7200.14)

Both are 7200rpm and have 64M cache.
http://www.seagate.com/internal-hard...ku=ST3000DM001

[XionCore]

3 TB drives are slower by design due to the more dense-packed platters (single disks inside the HDD)

[Outrigger]

Originally Posted by XionCore

3 TB drives are slower by design due to the more dense-packed platters (single disks inside the HDD)

Shouldn't the drives be faster due to the more dense packed platters?

[Metal Dice]

I would really like for us to be able to conclude on this. Is there anybody that could confirm the results of barefeats.

[Puevlo]

Originally Posted by Outrigger

Shouldn't the drives be faster due to the more dense packed platters?

No. As the data is smaller the reader has to squint harder to read it.

[Metal Dice]

Is there anybody else that could contribute with benchmark results or something. It find this HDD speed difference very important, but it seems as if I'm alone.

[dukee101]

Originally Posted by Puevlo

No. As the data is smaller the reader has to squint harder to read it.

No, that's simply untrue.

Higher areal densities mean there's more data crammed into the same amount of space, which means that once the read-write head scans any given block, it will read/write more in a given moment than if the density were lower.

Increased areal density therefore leads to increased speeds. The more gigabytes you can pack onto a platter, the faster your hard disk drive should become.

[Mr. Retrofire]

Originally Posted by Puevlo

No. As the data is smaller the reader has to squint harder to read it.

Source?