We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Been looking for a 2TB hard drive to replace my failed 750GB, this seems to be cheaper than the others posted.
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
hukd_bargains Avatar
hukd_bargains2y, 9m agoFound 2 years, 9 months ago
Options

All Comments

(14) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
tipsy1973 1 Like #1
This is the first sign of drives comming down in price
wobbler44#2
Could be old stock they have been hanging onto, most punters go for SATAIII now for a bit of future proofing. Also if you go to the deal and look at some of the reviews they are from 2009, whether this is significant or not I don't know.
jtalep#3
The WD Caviar Green drives are slow in comparison to other HDD's, I had one in my old computer from 3 years ago. Good for storage back up, but definitely not as a system HDD. If you have a bit more money and want a large capacity drive go for a Samsung Spinpoint or the WD Caviar Black.
Shonk#4
second drive in a day i have seen
external 2tb was 74.99 earlier

I just hope 3tb ones drop soon
im in the market for 2x3tb but there's no way im paying £115 each for them
MrPuddington#5
£40 per TB is about the going rate, so this is a good deal. You used to get offers for £30 per TB and less before the flood, but those days are gone, and may not come back any time soon.
bigup#6
The EADS came out before the EARS range. So this is old stock it seems.

How long is the warranty?
TehOwnageNoob#7
tipsy1973
This is the first sign of drives comming down in price
Actually, I thought it was the other day with the 2TB at PC World for £77 :D
Xelon#8
Not a bad deal but PC World deal better, for £3 more you get the latest model with SATA III and 64MB Buffer Full Retail version and you can pick up from youre local store as I did yesterday.
BritBrat#9
wobbler44
Could be old stock they have been hanging onto, most punters go for SATAIII now for a bit of future proofing. Also if you go to the deal and look at some of the reviews they are from 2009, whether this is significant or not I don't know.

Not at all, I would not put to much faith in Amazon reviews.

Next time you look at an Amazon review take a good look as sometimes the review is not even about the same product and when I say sometimes I mean more than often.

Edited By: BritBrat on May 18, 2012 08:12
andymagic#10
jtalep
The WD Caviar Green drives are slow in comparison to other HDD's, I had one in my old computer from 3 years ago. Good for storage back up, but definitely not as a system HDD. If you have a bit more money and want a large capacity drive go for a Samsung Spinpoint or the WD Caviar Black.

I agree, while they are slower than 7200RPM drives they're not too bad as a system drive, but something like this is ideal for storing media on, I've got 8 x WD20EARX in RAID 5 and if I copy a large amount of data from one directory to another on the same volume I get a sustained 250MB/s (that's reading from the same drive letter that it's writing to)

A single EARX will read at 110MB/s and write at about 95MB/s sustained, it's the seek time that isn't great.
slimy31#11
To be honest speed is relative, whichever drives I've bought have always seemed faster than the old ones simply because three or four years have passed and technology has moved on. I bought a 5400 rpm drive thinking it would be slower than the 7200 drive I was replacing, turns out there was some voodoo going on inside that allowed the seemingly slower drive to run faster than the other. I think it was the number of platters or something?

So yes, Caviar Green might be slower than a spinpoint, but still probably faster than the 750Gb that the OP is replacing it with.
Xelon#12
No longer available
dangel#13
Rotational speed is only part of the story - density of data, number of platters and buffer size also have a big effect. I have a 5900rpm drive with 64mb cache in my htpc (media drive) and it's excellent for that purpose.

You may as well go back to the days of claiming one cpu is faster than another because of higher clock speed..


Edited By: dangel on May 18, 2012 10:26: :)
hukd_bargains#14
Woohoo! First post with descent heat...thanks! :)

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