Hitachi Deskstar 1TB Hard Drive SATAII 7200rpm 16MB 49.99 @ Ebuyer (Free Delivery) - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
The DeskstarTM 7K2000 hard drive delivers a colossal two terabytes of storage capacity and 7200 RPM performance in a standard 3.5-inch form factor. Now in its fourth-generation, the 7K2000 is based on a robust mechanical design that continues to set the industry standard for quality and reliability. Through a patented ramp load/unload design, data heads are moved to a ramp away from the disk where they rest during periods of inactivity.

Free Delivery
More From Ebuyer:

All Comments

(55) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
Am I missing something:? It's pre-order and £69.44inc. vat:whistling:

Cheapest 1TB drive I can find on ebuyer

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/158798 1TB £54.99

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/173804 1TB £55.03
#2
Geemac
Am I missing something:? It's pre-order and £69.44inc. vat:whistling:

The price has changed in the last few minutes, it's now £49.99
#3
Thanks, why do ebuyer prices go up and down all the time
#4
Geemac
Thanks, why do ebuyer prices go up and down all the time


It's the world of technology, it's not just ebuyer prices that yoyo...
#5
Is this a 1TB or 2TB as the description states a 2TB and the model number of 7K2000 is for a 2TB drive.
#6
lukehunter69
It's the world of technology, it's not just ebuyer prices that yoyo...


Yes but ebuyer it’s a minute by minute yoyo;-)
#7
wackyraces
Is this a 1TB or 2TB as the description states a 2TB and the model number of 7K2000 is for a 2TB drive.


Hitachi GST
Hitachi Deskstar 0S02573 1TB Hard Drive SATAII 7200rpm 16MB Cache - OEM
#8
I read the main description but have a look at the overview further down. Seems to go on about a 2TB drive.
#9
wackyraces
I read the main description but have a look at the overview further down. Seems to go on about a 2TB drive.


Ah I see what you mean:thumbsup:
#10
Geemac
Thanks, why do ebuyer prices go up and down all the time


They put prices up to try and make it look like a big saving , highly illegal as old price needs to be at that price for somethink like minimum of 30 days, but hey so far they have got away with it
#11
I'm confused about the 1 or 2 TB too - can anyone clarify this?
#12
is it better than a samsung f3?

i can get the f3 for £51 from scan.
suspended#13
it's deathstar, i hate these hitachi hard drives
#14
DrKnowI.T.
They put prices up to try and make it look like a big saving , highly illegal as old price needs to be at that price for somethink like minimum of 30 days, but hey so far they have got away with it


I thought that only applied to high street stores, it has to have been at the higher price for 30 consecutive days at 1 of there stores
#15
The model number is for the 2 gig, but the cache should be 32MB. Hoping it's actually the 2 gig, in which case it would be an incredible bargain, but I guess that's a bit of a stretch...
#16
LegendPixel
it's deathstar, i hate these hitachi hard drives


zurich
is it better than a samsung f3?

i can get the f3 for £51 from scan.


I agree,its a deathstar...worst hd ever was made. Samsung F3 much better.
#17
I dont quite understand the confusion.

It is indeed a 1TB hard drive for £49.99.

Personally, I would now only buy a 1.5TB or 2TB hard disk, as the price/GB on those drives is lower.

A 2TB drive can be had for less than £90 (excl delivery), so I would want to pay less than £45 for this drive.

Regarding the comment surrounds the "death star" - that series of drive (75GXP, IIRC), was many many years ago. I think almost 10 years back, since which time IBM and Hitachi have released many generations of drives, which have not suffered unusually high failure rates. Based on this, I don't understand why Hitachi drives in 2010, are being tarnished by the reputation of an IBM drive which was manufactured a decade ago.
#18
16mb cache? Rubbish - go for one with 64mb
#19
Geemac
I thought that only applied to high street stores, it has to have been at the higher price for 30 consecutive days at 1 of there stores


They can change their prices as they please.

It's only when they want to describe something as reduced that the sale of goods act comes into play.
#20
I hought that only applied to goods which you were saying there was a saving on?
#21
sunama
I dont quite understand the confusion.

It is indeed a 1TB hard drive for £49.99.

Personally, I would now only buy a 1.5TB or 2TB hard disk, as the price/GB on those drives is lower.

A 2TB drive can be had for less than £90 (excl delivery), so I would want to pay less than £45 for this drive.



You don't want anything above 1TB for your boot drive. Any bigger and things will be slow.
#22
LegendPixel
it's deathstar, i hate these hitachi hard drives

Darn, I was gonna say that!

Wouldn't touch one of there with a proverbial barge pole. I'll stick to Samsung / WD which haven't let me down. These IBM/Hiachi Deathstars are simply trouble!
#23
Q-Tec
These IBM/Hiachi Deathstars are simply trouble!


Got an up to date source for that or are you just going on something you read back in 1999 about IBM Deskstar drives having a problem? Not trying to be cheeky, but I don't think your comment stands up.

Happy to be corrected if you really know different however.
#24
Q-Tec
Darn, I was gonna say that!

Wouldn't touch one of there with a proverbial barge pole. I'll stick to Samsung / WD which haven't let me down. These IBM/Hiachi Deathstars are simply trouble!


YAWN boring, change the record, anyone that's been in this industry for more than 5 minutes will tell you ALL hard drives from ALL manufacturers fail they're mechanical devices they go wrong. Sometimes a manufacturer will change a process and you'll get a duff line for awhile, this happened to the OLD IBM Deskstar drives nothing to do with them in modern terms in fact I don't think theyre even made in the same factory.

Having said that I stick to Samsung because they currently make cracking drives AND their warranty return centre is in Surrey so if you do need to return one you're not posting it to Europe
#25
With the 2010 digital act coming into force, hard drives of this size will be useless for most people.
#26
LegendPixel
it's deathstar, i hate these hitachi hard drives


Didn't take long did it...

What's your opinion on HDMI cables and battery farmed chicken?
#27
LegendPixel
it's deathstar, i hate these hitachi hard drives


I still have a Deskstar 75GXP going strong in an old PC I use as an mp3 player in my workshop, must have been the only good one.
#28
mamboboy
Anybody who thinks the Deskstar is still a 'Deathstar' need to stop living in the past. If you just googled the problem, you'll see the problem was fixed YEARS ago. I have a 500GB Deskstar which is around 2 years old now and is still performing brilliantly...
The 3 year warranty shows how confident they are in the product now.


Totally agree, I have been building my own PC's since the early 90's and have had every brand of HD out. The only ones which have not failed are the IBM/Hitachi/Deskstars.

Also anyone with any PC savvy will appreciate they do make some of the fastest standard speed drives.

G
#29
superzab
With the 2010 digital act coming into force, hard drives of this size will be useless for most people.


That's only true for those who can't be bothered to learn how to use the web e.g. SSL and usegroup:whistling:
#30
Feb 2009 bought a 1TB external Hard Drive for £90 it failed last week when i took it apart expecting a cheap hard drive it was in fact a WD 1TB caviar green did a google check 3 year warranty when i tired to make a claim thet said i only covers if you buy in raw state not in an encloseure so i had to buy a new one lost all my films and dater had 3 small ones before that. The moral of the story
DON;T PUT ALL YOUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET
#31
I just love all these "my drive's better than" comments. Here's another one to throw in the mix! Having used many different brands over the years I don't find any one better or worse. Just returned a faulty Samsung 1.5T after 5 hours of use, but I would buy again unless I see a trend!
#32
londislagerhound
They can change their prices as they please.

It's only when they want to describe something as reduced that the sale of goods act comes into play.


Thats what i meant but didn't put clearly:oops:
#33
Bigfootpete
16mb cache? Rubbish - go for one with 64mb

Differences in cache size will make virtually no difference, it's largely just marketing.
#34
Weenie Beenie
You don't want anything above 1TB for your boot drive. Any bigger and things will be slow.

What nonsense, larger drives will have no negative impact on speed. In fact the larger drives are more likely to use the cutting edge areal densities, so will give greater speed.
#35
Weenie Beenie
You don't want anything above 1TB for your boot drive. Any bigger and things will be slow.


By this reasoning we should all be using 250GB hard disks for our boot drives.

Luckily, the speed of a hard disk isnt dictated by its storage capacity. In fact in general, as hard disk sizes increase, so does its speed (which is the opposite to what you have implied).

Based on the above, I have to disagree with you on this.
#36
Rich44
YAWN boring, change the record, anyone that's been in this industry for more than 5 minutes will tell you ALL hard drives from ALL manufacturers fail they're mechanical devices they go wrong. Sometimes a manufacturer will change a process and you'll get a duff line for awhile, this happened to the OLD IBM Deskstar drives nothing to do with them in modern terms in fact I don't think theyre even made in the same factory.

Having said that I stick to Samsung because they currently make cracking drives AND their warranty return centre is in Surrey so if you do need to return one you're not posting it to Europe


Agreed. It appears for some to be fashionable to make these type of unfounded comments. Hard drive failure rates are very much, closely guarded secrets by manufacturers, so the comments of "DeathStar", "Maxtor", etc mentioned by unapprised people have no foundation. Since the figures are so clandestine, very few can actually comment on the failure rates.
#37
I had two drives Desk/Deathstars fail on me, one taking out a RAID array and another on a backup system. One failure is unlucky, two is a bloody nightmare. I wouldn't trust the brand again.
#38
dcx_badass

Actually no, it does make a bit of different, as the platter density is higher, ie. more data on the outside (like a race track the inside lane is the fastest), so more data on the outside is slower, doesn't make that much difference though.


If you used benchmarking programs, that program may pick up this small difference, but to a human being, in a blind test, it would be a miracle if he/she managed to tell the difference.
#39
sunama
By this reasoning we should all be using 250GB hard disks for our boot drives.

Luckily, the speed of a hard disk isnt dictated by its storage capacity. In fact in general, as hard disk sizes increase, so does its speed (which is the opposite to what you have implied).

Based on the above, I have to disagree with you on this.


BlackAle
What nonsense, larger drives will have no negative impact on speed. In fact the larger drives are more likely to use the cutting edge areal densities, so will give greater speed.


There is some truth in Weenie Beenie's comments, but there are counter arguments too.

Extra capacity may require more platters. It stands to reason that extra platters leads to higher latencies and since they are generally low density, less data is read or written to per second.

The counter argument is that increasing density on single platters can be used for increased capacity. This is achieved by increasing the linear density per track and increasing the number of tracks. Since each read is applied per track it is the increased linear density per track that gives rise to improved read and write speeds. Increasing number of tracks, however, does not lead to performance increases though.
#40
dcx_badass
Actually no, it does make a bit of different, as the platter density is higher, ie. more data on the outside (like a race track the inside lane is the fastest), so more data on the outside is slower, doesn't make that much difference though.

Actually transfer speeds will be higher at the outer edges, as there is more area to cover. This is where HD's start reading. So your analogy of a race track is totally wrong, it's the reverse.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!