Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 26, 2008, 11:29 AM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Toshiba Introduces 5400 RPM SATA 1.8" HDD



Toshiba today announced 80 (single platter) and 120 GB (dual platter) 1.8" hard disk drives that use the Serial ATA (SATA) interface and operate at 5400 RPM.

Currently, Apple's MacBook Air and iPod Classic utilize 80 GB single platter 1.8" hard drives running at 4200 RPM over a Parallel ATA (PATA), though the Air has a solid state drive option. By incorporating the SATA bus and increasing the rotational speed, the performance should elevate to that of standard 2.5" drives used in larger laptops such as Apple's MacBook or MacBook Pro.

Additional Reading: Maximum MacBook Air Drive 80GB for Now

Article Link
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 11:34 AM   #2
Knolly
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Just to point out this isn't exactly 100% accurate... the 80gb Classic uses a single platter, while the 160gb Classic uses dual platter, which is why it's thicker.
Knolly is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 11:36 AM   #3
ramuman
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
From the data sheet it looks like both are 8mm 2 platter drives, not the 5mm needed for the MBA.
ramuman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 01:36 PM   #4
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Hopefully in the next AirBook update. My fiance wants one and will probably get one by summer or a little after that, so getting an even faster Air is always a nice option.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 01:41 PM   #5
mkrishnan
Moderator emeritus
 
mkrishnan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Moving everything over to SATA so that there's just one drive standard out there is great. But is the PATA 1.8" drive really bus-limited in terms of speed? Somehow I have a hard time believing that, given the size of the cache and the smaller linear velocities incurred with the smaller platter, that these drives can even keep up with the fastest PATA standard at this point....
__________________
Mohan
mkrishnan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 01:51 PM   #6
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkrishnan View Post
Moving everything over to SATA so that there's just one drive standard out there is great. But is the PATA 1.8" drive really bus-limited in terms of speed? Somehow I have a hard time believing that, given the size of the cache and the smaller linear velocities incurred with the smaller platter, that these drives can even keep up with the fastest PATA standard at this point....
They can't. I am no drive fanatic but I do know that the drive speed plays a major role in the speed of the device. The iPod classic is SLOW at times, taking anywhere from 4-5 seconds to play a song from a different playlist.

Comparing the 5400 rpm 2.5" drives to the 4200rpm drives gives the same results.

Comparing a PATA 4200rpm drive to a SATA 5400 rpm drive would probably give the same results.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 04:23 PM   #7
longofest
Editor emeritus
 
longofest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Falls Church, VA
Send a message via AIM to longofest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Skunk View Post
They can't. I am no drive fanatic but I do know that the drive speed plays a major role in the speed of the device. The iPod classic is SLOW at times, taking anywhere from 4-5 seconds to play a song from a different playlist.

Comparing the 5400 rpm 2.5" drives to the 4200rpm drives gives the same results.

Comparing a PATA 4200rpm drive to a SATA 5400 rpm drive would probably give the same results.
The reason that you're experiencing delays in switching music isn't necessarily because the drive is slow but because it has to spin up.

I agree that the 4200 RPM drives probably aren't tapping all of PATA's bandwidth, but the slowness you are describing sounds much more like a spin-up thing than a seek and transfer rate thing.
longofest is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 04:28 PM   #8
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by longofest View Post
The reason that you're experiencing delays in switching music isn't necessarily because the drive is slow but because it has to spin up.

I agree that the 4200 RPM drives probably aren't tapping all of PATA's bandwidth, but the slowness you are describing sounds much more like a spin-up thing than a seek and transfer rate thing.
That might be the case for the iPod then. It does vibrate when I do change playlists, and it might store the next song needed to playing in cache or something.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 04:37 PM   #9
mkrishnan
Moderator emeritus
 
mkrishnan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Skunk View Post
That might be the case for the iPod then. It does vibrate when I do change playlists, and it might store the next song needed to playing in cache or something.
4-5 seconds does seem unseasonably long... that was a worse case scenario even for iPods from four years ago. They never really got much faster than that?
__________________
Mohan
mkrishnan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 04:49 PM   #10
reallynotnick
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Well if these are dual platter HDD's then there is no way to fit this into a MBA, so move along folks nothing to see here.
reallynotnick is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 07:08 PM   #11
hotsauce
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Wirelessly posted (Apple Communication Device: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A93 Safari/419.3)

That's too bad. Moving along now.
hotsauce is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 08:21 PM   #12
winterspan
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkrishnan View Post
Moving everything over to SATA so that there's just one drive standard out there is great. But is the PATA 1.8" drive really bus-limited in terms of speed? Somehow I have a hard time believing that, given the size of the cache and the smaller linear velocities incurred with the smaller platter, that these drives can even keep up with the fastest PATA standard at this point....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Skunk View Post
They can't. I am no drive fanatic but I do know that the drive speed plays a major role in the speed of the device. The iPod classic is SLOW at times, taking anywhere from 4-5 seconds to play a song from a different playlist.
Comparing a PATA 4200rpm drive to a SATA 5400 rpm drive would probably give the same results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by longofest View Post
The reason that you're experiencing delays in switching music isn't necessarily because the drive is slow but because it has to spin up.

I agree that the 4200 RPM drives probably aren't tapping all of PATA's bandwidth, but the slowness you are describing sounds much more like a spin-up thing than a seek and transfer rate thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reallynotnick View Post
Well if these are dual platter HDD's then there is no way to fit this into a MBA, so move along folks nothing to see here.

the Parallel ATA interface will handle up to 133MB/s. There is no way in hell these drives are even coming close to saturating that. I've heard in the past that PATA interfaces use a lot less power than the SATA equivalent, and thus the reason for the PATA in the Macbook Air.
That said, I hope they are able to translate this 5400rpm speed development over to a PATA drive, and one that is single platter as well.
winterspan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 09:16 PM   #13
Chef Medeski
macrumors 6502a
 
Chef Medeski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New York, NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkrishnan View Post
4-5 seconds does seem unseasonably long... that was a worse case scenario even for iPods from four years ago. They never really got much faster than that?
Nope. I found they actually got worst in the 6G. I think its primarily due to all the graphics. The CPU seems to bottleneck when just changing menus. Annoying but w/e.... I imagine the 7th will be perfect. Plenty of space for Flash and HD, with 32/64GBs of Flash, and faster, more efificent 80/160GB HDs along with faster CPUs and larger caches and bam. You have more efficient and quicker. Probably the best before they start introducing new mediums or designs.
Chef Medeski is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2008, 09:33 PM   #14
twoodcc
macrumors P6
 
twoodcc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Right side of wrong
Send a message via AIM to twoodcc Send a message via MSN to twoodcc
great news! but it will still be awhile before i'll be buying a macbook air. but i do look forward to seeing it evolve though
__________________
tville
Smarter than the average bear
twoodcc is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2008, 06:27 AM   #15
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkrishnan View Post
4-5 seconds does seem unseasonably long... that was a worse case scenario even for iPods from four years ago. They never really got much faster than that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chef Medeski View Post
Nope. I found they actually got worst in the 6G. I think its primarily due to all the graphics. The CPU seems to bottleneck when just changing menus. Annoying but w/e.... I imagine the 7th will be perfect. Plenty of space for Flash and HD, with 32/64GBs of Flash, and faster, more efificent 80/160GB HDs along with faster CPUs and larger caches and bam. You have more efficient and quicker. Probably the best before they start introducing new mediums or designs.
Yeah... I have that issue to, and it's not when It's from a cold start. I usually have a wait when I start sifting through menus after listening to a long stretch of music. As mkishnan said though, it may just be the spin up time.

It also may be a result of the size of the HDD. 80GB is large, and 160 on two platters (the one I have) is twice that size, so the spin up and seek time may just be the result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by twoodcc View Post
great news! but it will still be awhile before i'll be buying a macbook air. but i do look forward to seeing it evolve though
Same here. It's a very wonderful machine as a Rev A and it far more sturdier than the MBPs that I have used. I hope the Rev B not only uses these drive or an equivalent but they also get that ONE extra USB port that some have been asking for.... along with a few other things.

Personally, once I used it in the store I could have gotten along just fine with the single port, since I don't touch that many USB devices anyway. If I am not cutting footage or images on my book then I am doing the basic stuff and a little bit of writing and organizing, and neither that nor video editing needs USB. The Air could be a nice book to complement my 17" MBP if I ever resorted to two portables.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2008, 06:42 PM   #16
ArchiMark
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Silicon Valley
*%$#@, I hate it when this happens....

I just bought and installed a Toshiba 1.8" 100GB HD in my lil' Fujitsu U810 about 3 weeks ago....

__________________
Silicon Valley Digerati
MacBook C2D & iPad
ArchiMark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2008, 05:35 PM   #17
nemaslov
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Francisco
240 GB iPod Ēlassics? YUM. I would LOVE that. Remember, some of us want 50,000 songs on our pods. I got 33K so far and there are plenty more CDs in my collection to load in.
__________________
Agent man
nemaslov is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
5400 rpm HDD compared to 7200 rpm in my 2006 iMac MajorPain Mac mini 13 Apr 25, 2013 09:07 PM
5400 vs 7200 RPM HDD oosk2k8 iMac 1 Feb 6, 2013 12:14 PM
HDD speed different to older 5400 rpm HDDs? Poki Mac mini 0 Oct 23, 2012 06:26 PM
5400 or 7200 rpm HDD? wiehazy MacBook Pro 20 Sep 17, 2012 05:51 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:02 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC