I put a Hitachi HTS722020K9SA00 into my 2Ghz Core 2 Duo MacBook. It's a 7200 200gb 16mb sata drive. I've long thought increasing hard disk speed makes a world of difference. It sacrificed battery life, but I can live with that. Xlr8yourmac use to have some great laptop hard disk shootouts, I don't think they've updated these to more recent models lately though. They were extremely helpful in finding the best value/speed/battery balance.

I'll agree 100% that the 4500 RPM drives of old were the Achilles heel of those machines, but I'm not convinced that average users will discern any noticeable difference between the 5400 and 7200 RPM drives. I went from a 7200 RPM drive "down" to a 5400, and I don't really see any difference. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

SSDs will blow the holy hemorrhaging crap out of an old 4500 rpm drive. Those things can't get down in price fast enough.

The older drives spun at 4200RPM not 4500RPM.
If you get your facts straight, people will give your opinion more credence and might take you more seriously.

While I agree that 4200 to 7200 is a big performance gain and probably noticeable to most people, but 5400 to 7200 is probably much harder to see unless you have a specific application in mind.

Alan Zelchick used the figure of 4500 rpm; that's why John put it in quotes.
Perhaps he was mistaken; no harm, no foul.

Mark

Yes, heat dissipation is the issue. Heat cause discomfort, uses up battery power to dissipate, and extra noise from the fans. Plus, the components will get fried from the extra heat and will have a reduced useful life.

I would think twice about upgrading to a faster hard drive unless it was absolutely necessary. The extra speed is nice on a desktop that is spacious and can dissipate heat better. For a laptop that spends time on your lap, heat may not be a feature that I'd be running out to upgrade to.

Faster drives are available. Apple uses 5400 drives standard and 7200 drives are available for the brave, or those who really need the extra speed in a hurry on the go. Unless, you're a news van reporter, you probably don't qualify. Stick with the slower, cooler drive and invest in some extra memory, especially if you keep a lot of programs running simultaneously, or work with large files.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
The older drives spun at 4200RPM not 4500RPM.
If you get your facts straight, people will give your opinion more credence and might take you more seriously.

Here in Japan where we can buy 320GB and 500GB for that matter hard disks, they give you the best of both worlds (speed and capacity). The drives are 5400rpm, not 7200rpm, but they are faster then 4500rpm. And, what you might lose on the rotation from 7200rpm to 5400rpm, is made up through higher data densities. Their will be more data throughput per linear distance on the 320GB then there will be on a 200GB hard disk. So, in terms of cost performance, we can gain higher data storage and performance at reasonable prices. Besides, there is the heat issue with higher rpm'd drives not to mention higher costs and lower capacity.

One note, the 500GB 2.5" on the market right now is 12.5mm. Meaning, it won't fit into a macbook / pro. But, I heard rumored that Samsung (Korea) will be coming out with one within that will be 9.5mm. Also, Samsung will be releasing a 256GB SSD drive later this year with claims of performing better then 2x that of conventional moving parts drive. All in the interest of progress, over time. so that'll mute the rotational speeds issue. (^J^)

Jerry
Tokyo, Japan.

As bit density goes up, rotational speed does not tell the whole story. A higher density 5400 rpm drive can often beat a 7200 rpm drive at maximum data transfer rates. And the lower speed lower heat dissipation saves battery life.

I agree that a fast hard drive can make a big difference, especially when the cache hit rate is low and the CPU starts swapping large files back and forth between cache and hard drive. Swap space under OS X can go to 512 MB or more (at least on my Powerbook). My PB was also pokey compared to my Intel machine, but when I upgraded the RAM, everything changed. Now it is faster than ever. And the hard drive is still the same (a 4200 RPM Travelstar I think, I'll have to check on that one.)

the consensus seems to be that going from 4200 to 5400, 1200 rpm more is a major improvement. Yet the 1800 rpm between 5400 and 7200 is said to be marginal.

When I get a MBP, I want at least the largest 5400 rpm drive I can get. But will a 7200 rpm blow it away, or burn a hole where I don't need another?

After upgrading my laptop drive to a Seagate perpendicular recording 5400 drive I can add my voice to the bit density not purely rpm argument. It comes down to the seek and read times. Increasing the rotational speed of the drive is one way, increasing the density is another. The reviews on xlr8yourmac back this up, that a 5400 perpendicular recording drive outperforms or equals a similar sized 7200 drive speed but runs quieter, cooler and uses less battery.