PDA

View Full Version : IBM 75GXP or 60GXP?



John Bailey
06-14-2001, 03:53 PM
Which of these drives is better?

Louie
06-14-2001, 03:58 PM
IBM's site seems to be down right now, but they seem to be the same model with different storage capacities. 60 and 75 GB's.

Louie
06-14-2001, 04:08 PM
IBM site is back up. The 60 GXP is designed for A/V and the 75GXP is for general use. From this page http://www.storage.ibm.com/techsup/hddtech/table.htm#Ultrastar you can get to the specs for both.

magician
06-15-2001, 05:07 AM
I don't see a huge difference. I mean, they are both IDE drives.

John Bailey
06-15-2001, 08:11 AM
I was going to install a slave drive in a friends G4 450 DP. They are using the machine for Final Cut Pro. I was wondering if the 60 GXP would be better for video editing than the 75 GXP?

John

dragon_x
06-15-2001, 09:18 AM
From what I have noticed - the faster drives are smaller -

You will often see 7200RPM in the smaller drives before it is migrated to the biggest drives. It always seems like the biggest drives are a bit slower - rpm or otherwise.

Note (on the SCSI side) the 7200RPM Barracude has a 180GB version.
Note the 10,000RPM Cheetah has a 73GB version.
The 15,000RPM Cheetah only has an 18GB version.
(good think you can strip drives with SCSI)

So if he wants the max ide performance get the 60GB! http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

------------------
So long and thanks for all the fish!

trag
06-15-2001, 11:44 AM
The 60GXP is newer and slightly faster. Its platters hold 20GB each. The older 75GXP gets 15 GB on each platter. More data on the same sized platter means that more total data spins under the heads in the same amount of time, making the drive faster.

John Bailey
06-15-2001, 12:56 PM
Do the Gurus sell the newer drive? It sounds like it performs better than the older 75 GXP.

Louie
06-15-2001, 02:55 PM
We carry the 75GXP. Magician might be able to get you a 60 GXP.

Magician, are you there?

magician
06-15-2001, 03:11 PM
we can check with john, and see which drives are actually shipping. Keep in mind that press releases are exactly that: what really matters is what is in the distribution channel.

magician
06-15-2001, 04:32 PM
he is checking with IBM disty now, awaiting a call-back.

hang in there...

magician
06-15-2001, 04:55 PM
ok.

here's the deal. We sell GXP's. If we don't dictate which version to IBM, EITHER the 60GXP or the 75GXP will come. Either will work fine for AV, and again, I want to stress that we're talking about IDE drives at 7200 rpm. IMO, it's no big deal which you use.

if you prefer, you may dictate a 60GXP in the comments field of your order form, and that is what we will pull and ship. If we don't have the 60GXP on the shelf, but do have the 75GXP's, your order will be held until your preferred version comes in. LIkewise, the opposite holds true, as well.

ok?

marrand
07-10-2001, 02:49 PM
I don't know if anyone will return to this topic, but I will post my question anyway.
Last year I bought 45GB 75GXP.
Last month I ordered 60GB 75GXP. But this is a discontinued model, to be replaced by 60GXP. So, I did some research on the specs, and chose the older model on the basis of areal density.

For 60GB capacity, the specs read as follows:
1. Maxtor Diamond Plus 60: 14.5 density, 3 disks
2. IBM 75GXP: 11.0 density, 4 disks
3. IBM 60GXP: 15.3 density, 3 disks

Yes, the 60GXP is a little faster and a little quieter and uses a little less power. But I was worried about the density for this reason:
the more data bits per unit area, the closer the head must be to the surface; the closer the head is to the surface, the higher risk of accidental damage. I preferred the "safer" route. (To repeat: all comparisons are based on the same 60GB capacity and 7200 RPM).

To my knowledge, the inherent technology of both IBM drives is essentially the same. So, if they (and Maxtor) can get away with 15 areal density and still feel confident that accidental scratching is very unlikely, then an 11 density HD should be extra reliable.

Does my reasoning make sense?
(I am hoping a master guru will stumble on this post and enlighten me further).



[This message has been edited by marrand (edited 10 July 2001).]

dragon_x
07-10-2001, 10:58 PM
Does my reasoning make sense?

Not necessarily. You do have a good point - with everything being equal. However, as technology progresses vendors are able to do more with less. If you look at the SCSI drives, you will note that they are ALL warranteed for the SAME period of time. So there are a few possibilites
1) The drives, on average, will all last about the same
2) The companies are CRAZY and dont care if they loose money replaces bad drives http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The 7200RPM, 10 000RPM and 15 000RPM drives are all 5 year drives.
I'm sure all those IBM drives are rated/warranteed for 3 years.

The vendor can build better motors, heads and impliment standards that help prevent crashes and other issues. Vendors often list the shock (in G-Forces) a drive can take while off, idle & in operation. You might want to check this out too.

All drives eventually fail.
I suppose with any new drive there is always the chance that the vendor had a glitch or oversight and there may be issues - but this will happen from time to time with anything. Remember INTEL & RAMBUS? http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I'm sure a master Gurus will be along in a few hours.

------------------
Life in the fast lane leads to:
The Resteraunt At The End Of The Universe

marrand
07-11-2001, 11:35 AM
"...with everything being equal. However, as technology progresses..."

I decide to buy a HD on a given day. That day everything is equal. I can't wait another year for technology to progress. So, I pick among what is available WHEN I want it, not what WILL be available when I am dead.

The issue of warranty is primarily a marketing game, in part based on the pretty good reliability of the machines made today. My Camry is warranteed for 2 years, but if does not last 10, then I feel a bit shortchanged. No, the companies do not loose money replacing bad drives; they already anticipate this loss and figure it in the wholesale price. They lose money only if they figure wrong.

Ah yes....the G-forces. IF my new drive works well for a few days after installation, then I am not worried about G-forces since I have no plans to play football with it. Once happy in its resting place, the new drive will experience only two kinds of abuse: start/stop and spin. Neither is a big shock in terms of G forces. So, I look at reliability in terms of the abuse I give it everyday. Estimating 3 starts per day, every day, then the rated 40,000 starts will last me 36 years!! By then you and I will be having vintage wine in the restaurant at the end of the Universe.

The other abuse is spin. And that's why I was concentrating on the distance of the head from the disk surface. (You say lightening and power surges as well? Nah....my system is loaded with so many protective devices that if lightening struck my house directly, the entire structure will be burning but my Mac will be humming along).

Why do I worry about reliability? Simple: I am a mac user; it's in my bloood. The Mac is not only lovable, but probably the most reliable consumer computer ever built. (Whew....finally I felt safe saying this.....in a differenct mileu, I would be tarred and feathered by the Wintel crowd).

dragon_x
07-11-2001, 10:03 PM
I decide to buy a HD on a given day. That day everything is equal. I can't wait another year for technology to progress. So, I pick among what is available WHEN I want it, not what WILL be available when I am dead.

Wow, not sure how you got that. What I was referring to was the simple fact that one drive model was older (say 6 months behind) the other model. So the technology has already progressed. I suppose you could wait until your dead... http://www.macgurus.com/ubb/confused.gif

The newer drive would probably be the better choice. The faster RPMs, higher areal density, etc... would be the one to go for. Yes the drive company would lose money if they really miscalculated the life expectancy of the drive. So I would say that the reliability of the newer, 'cutting edge' (not bleeding edge) drive would be the same. HD warranties are not like car warranties.

Just because you are paranoid does not meant they are not out to get you! http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

marrand
07-12-2001, 11:59 AM
Ok dragon_x, it was fun "talking" with you. But I think the 75GXP/60GXP topic ran its course since
the new 75GXP supply is slowly being exhausted (by anxious buyers, of course!) and the 60 series are now current. As I wrote initially, I ordered the 75GXP before availing myself to gurus' enlightment, and the deed is done. The unit arrrived yesterday. Post-mortems to the point where rigor mortis sets in may not be appropriate for this forum.

Your point: since model1 is 6 months older than model2, model2 is higher technology and thus better. My point: not necessarily. Model1 may easily possess the higher technology but the profit margins were too small, and IBM introduced model2 with lower manufacturing costs.

In any case, I am looking forward to further discussions with you on other topics. http://macgurus.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif