Showing Results: Most Recent
This review is from: WD SE WD2000F9YZ 2TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Enterprise Hard Drive
Pros: Great spindle drive. Most are long lasting, fast, and speedy.
Cons: I had one die on me after 2 months of use on my workstation. This surprised me, as I've been purchasing WD Black drives for servers for over 10 years. A few only died close to the end of the 5 year warranty period. Most live long enough that the storage size isn't useful any more. So I placed a lot of trust in using a single WD Black drive on my workstation, and it died. I shoulda-coulda-woulda raided it. The morale of the story is to never trust a spindle drive, no matter how awesome they are. (Minus one egg due to my own dumb frustrations.)READ FULL REVIEW
Pros: Purchased 8 of these as a secondary tablespace array for a postgres database server. (The primary being 8 Dell enterprise SSDs) Installed on a Dell R720 with a PERC H710 card, bonnie++ reports 917MB/s seq writes, 1207MB/s reads! That's actually slower than my SSD array's sequencial rate of 843MB/s write, 979MB/s read. But as expected, the random seek latency is about 38ms with these drives, compared to 10ms with SSDs. Also, WD warranty is awesome, I always buy WD for my servers.
Cons: My observed seek latency of 38ms is significantly slower than I expected. It's also very difficult to find the average seek time of these drives in WD's official specs. So far I only found a mention of 3.6ms on a UK website, but I'm not sure I believe that. (See other thoughts)
Other Thoughts: My numbers could be due to many factors, like RAID hardware, stripe size, partition alignment, etc, etc. Take it with a grain of salt. Running queries against large 12GB tables on this array still perform faster than my SSD array, so that says something. (I'm keeping my indexes on SSD still though) Also a heads up, if you stuff these in a Dell server the OSMA going to complain that they're not official Dell drives. They'll be in "warning" status indefinitely.READ FULL REVIEW
Pros: 4 monitor support, cheap price, DVI connectors without the need for adapters. Radeon support in Linux is pretty good these days. One bug with powersave mode, but other than that multi-monitor support with the open source radeon driver is way, way better than NVidia.
Cons: It's slow. But hey, you get what you pay for. glxgears runs at about 60FPS with the open source driver. (I didn't notice a speed difference with the Catalyst beta 14 driver) 2D scrolling in a web browser has a slight jitter to it, but it's only noticeable if you're paying attention to it. For these reasons it gets 4 eggs.
Other Thoughts: This isn't anything specifically bad about the card, but I had more troubles with the Catalyst linux driver than the open source radeon driver. Powersave mode (KDE) would mess up the virtual desktop size, and I'd have to reconfigure my display arrangements and rotations every time the screensaver came on. This might be specific to this card chipset, or just a KDE bug. In short, just turn off powersave mode. In my opinion, the open source radeon driver performs the same as the Catalyst driver, and has fewer issues. In fact, a fresh install of Kubuntu detected all of my displays and spanned them right out of the box! The NVidia architecture doesn't come close to this level of usability. (Multi-head + Xinerama or multiple virtual screens is very 1990's tech) Being able to drag windows across all of my monitors is well worth it. If you're looking for a simple linux workstation card for a development machine, this is a perfect purchase.READ FULL REVIEW