Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

losingstreak

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 17, 2009
7
0
I am looking at these two HDs to replace in my version 5,5 MBP.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...0711-Index-_-LaptopHardDrives-_-22136280-L01C

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...22810-Index-_-LaptopHardDrives-_-22136692-L0D

The later one had a review that said the buyer could not get it to work on his MBP of the same version. I just wanted to clarify and see if this was true. If it is, then what HD should I be looking at for around $60? I got a lot of help with picking this Mac here, so I figure I could get good help with this dumb question. Thanks.
 
I've seen plenty of folks with 500GB Scorpio Black. Maybe the HD he got was defective or he just didn't have a clue what he was doing. No need to worry, both will work
 
^^ i concur with hellhammer, there is no incompatibilities between that HDD model and your Mac. it will work perfectly fine :)

were you thinking of getting the 320gb or 500gb?

the 500gb may be *slightly* louder, nothing crazy though.
 
the 500gb may be *slightly* louder, nothing crazy though.

It shouldn't be. Both are double platter drives (2x160GB and 2x250GB) and run at 7200rpm so the only difference is that the 500GB is denser. Of course you may get a Monday sample but the same could happen with the 320GB model.

And you can't know is it louder unless you have both ;)
 
It shouldn't be. Both are double platter drives (2x160GB and 2x250GB) and run at 7200rpm so the only difference is that the 500GB is denser. Of course you may get a Monday sample but the same could happen with the 320GB model.

And you can't know is it louder unless you have both ;)

i wonder how much heavier the 250GB platters are over the 160GB platters :)
 
i wonder how much heavier the 250GB platters are over the 160GB platters :)

500GB weighs 111g while 320GB is 99g. Assuming the only difference is the platters, it makes it 6g heavier per platter or 0.067g heavier per GB ;)
 
500GB weighs 111g while 320GB is 99g. Assuming the only difference is the platters, it makes it 6g heavier per platter or 0.067g heavier per GB ;)

do you think it wise to assume the 500GB has a slightly more powerful motor for the spindle to account for changes in weight? at such high spindle rates the forces and power/torque required to keep it spinning must be phenomenal.
 
thanks for the help. I figured he did something, but he said he went to Apple about it, so you never know. I think I will get the 500 GB since it is larger for only a little bit more money.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
huh? they will work.
Not for everyone. I tried a Scorpio Blue 500gb in my 2009 MBP, constant beachballs and even writing in textedit would slow down so bad it simply wasn't usable. Swapped that out for a Seagate Momentous 7,200 500GB and everything was fine. Later swapped to a Hitachi, same specs, and it was fine too. Too lazy and no reason to swap back to the Seagate, so it is regulated to backup status in a USB enclosure. So IMO the WD was a proper Fail, and the Seagate and Hitachi are great, both quiet, fast with no perceptible vibration or noise. :cool:YMMV:cool:
 
Not for everyone. I tried a Scorpio Blue 500gb in my 2009 MBP, constant beachballs and even writing in textedit would slow down so bad it simply wasn't usable. Swapped that out for a Seagate Momentous 7,200 500GB and everything was fine. Later swapped to a Hitachi, same specs, and it was fine too. Too lazy and no reason to swap back to the Seagate, so it is regulated to backup status in a USB enclosure. So IMO the WD was a proper Fail, and the Seagate and Hitachi are great, both quiet, fast with no perceptible vibration or noise. :cool:YMMV:cool:

The same could have happened with any drive. Just because you had a bad drive doesn't mean that they all are.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.