Support NeoGAF

[thefunkyman]

how about taking a hit for science and backing up your touro pro and then connecting to the xbone to do some comparative tests?
I'll gladly use the mybook for my pc if touropro is significantly faster.

I would, but it's the main external drive I use for backing up my PC and it has about 2TB of data on it.

Here's a review of the hard drive that's inside a Touro Desk Pro 4TB: -

http://www.storagereview.com/hitachi_deskstar_7k4000_review

The non-Pro version has a slower 5,200 RPM drive inside it.

If you know what drive is inside your MyBook, maybe the same site has a review so you can get an idea which is faster. When I bought my Touro Desk Pro, it was arguably the best option around for 4TB externals, but that was a year or two ago and things may have changed.

 

[Black Republican]

so basically what ya'll saying is.......get a 7200rpm drive?

i dont think ill need more than 2tb hdd

 

[Black Republican]

As promised here are some more results. This time I used Forza. I did separate tests and using two different tracks and different number of AI opponents, since the more AI opponents the more data the game needs to load.

Test #1: Free Play, Track: Prague, AI Cars: 7
Internal HDD - 39.88 Seconds
External HDD - 26.59 Seconds

Test #2: Free Play, Track: Long Beach, AI Cars: 15
Internal HDD - 49.38 seconds
External HDD - 34.71 seconds

I started my timing as soon as the first load screen appears after hitting start race, I stopped the timing as soon as the track image disappears and shows information on times etc.

I am using a Seagate 4TB External Self Powered Drive STBV4000100. When I bought it at Fry's the sales person said it was a 5400rpm drive, but no where on Newegg or Seagate's website does it show the drive speed. So it may be faster, but not sure. As others pointed out, the size of the drives platter can also be the reason. I am not sure if there is a difference due to USB 3.0 or the internals SATA connection, I was just postng what I had heard in another thread. Regardless, load times in my tests are significantly faster than that of the internal HDD, which is good for me.

holy crap thats good

 

[MaulerX]

get the Seagate Expansion 3TB , it uses the barracuda which is a 7200 RPM drive and has excellent read/write speads over same price brands

the 4TB uses a 5900 RPM. so go with the 3TB for plenty of storage and much faster speeds.

Really? That's good to know. I guess that explains why the 3TB version is more expensive per TB.

 

[Xamdou]

As promised here are some more results. This time I used Forza. I did separate tests and using two different tracks and different number of AI opponents, since the more AI opponents the more data the game needs to load.

Test #1: Free Play, Track: Prague, AI Cars: 7
Internal HDD - 39.88 Seconds
External HDD - 26.59 Seconds

Test #2: Free Play, Track: Long Beach, AI Cars: 15
Internal HDD - 49.38 seconds
External HDD - 34.71 seconds

I started my timing as soon as the first load screen appears after hitting start race, I stopped the timing as soon as the track image disappears and shows information on times etc.

I am using a Seagate 4TB External Self Powered Drive STBV4000100. When I bought it at Fry's the sales person said it was a 5400rpm drive, but no where on Newegg or Seagate's website does it show the drive speed. So it may be faster, but not sure. As others pointed out, the size of the drives platter can also be the reason. I am not sure if there is a difference due to USB 3.0 or the internals SATA connection, I was just postng what I had heard in another thread. Regardless, load times in my tests are significantly faster than that of the internal HDD, which is good for me.

Nice results! You should add that to the OP.

 

[Omnii-chan]

Why is it that an external hard drive through a usb cable is faster than a hard drive integrated directly into the system? This is the first example I have ever seen of an external being faster than an internal drive that isn't completely outmatched in spec.

 

[MaulerX]

Why is it that an external hard drive through a usb cable is faster than a hard drive integrated directly into the system? This is the first example I have ever seen of an external being faster than an internal drive that isn't completely outmatched in spec.

If I'm not mistaken, its because USB 3.0 is faster than the internal SATA connection.

 

[morpix]

The internal drive is recording video too, that's why it's slower.

 

[thefunkyman]

Why is it that an external hard drive through a usb cable is faster than a hard drive integrated directly into the system? This is the first example I have ever seen of an external being faster than an internal drive that isn't completely outmatched in spec.

USB 3.0 isn't a bottleneck, so it's down to the speed of the drive. The internal drive is a 5,400 RPM laptop drive, basically, while some of the externals people have been testing are 7,200, or large capacity 5,400 RPM drives with a higher areal density.

 

[Omnii-chan]

USB 3.0 isn't a bottleneck, so it's down to the speed of the drive. The internal drive is a 5,400 RPM laptop drive, basically, while some of the externals people have been testing are 7,200, or large capacity drives 5,400 RPM drives with a higher areal density.

Whoops, I forgot that stock internal drives on next gen systems were 5400rpm.

But yeah I thought even USB 3 might bottleneck a 7200rpm drive, that's great it doesn't, thanks for that!

 

[mrklaw]

Damn, as a PS4 user I am super jelly of Xbox One users getting every cool improvement on their OS. I'm already out of space

I will get the console down the road so the more improvements, the better.

As a PS4 and Xbox owner, I wouldn't be jealous of the Xbox one install and load times at all. And you can already upgrade your internal drive.


The speed increases are quite significant. More than you'd expect from simple HDD differences. Probably when you're using the internal drive you're having contention with other OS demands

 

[Lima]

If I'm not mistaken, its because USB 3.0 is faster than the internal SATA connection.

Stop saying this. All of you in this thread.

The internal drive doesn't get limited by the SATA II port inside the box. No mechanical drive is fast enough to saturate it. Only the latest SSD's would be restrained by it and see a benefit from SATA III which is why neither Sony nor Microsoft put it on their motherboards.

It's not USB 3.0, it is the drive and the drive alone. Even a USB 2.0 external would be faster.

The 500GB Samsung they put in is the oldest and slowest shit you can find on the market today. All for cost reasons. Sony does the same.

 

[golem]

Have a 2TB SSHD coming.. cant wait to give it a try

 

[statham]

get the Seagate Expansion 3TB , it uses the barracuda which is a 7200 RPM drive and has excellent read/write speads over same price brands

the 4TB uses a 5900 RPM. so go with the 3TB for plenty of storage and much faster speeds.

by my quick research, the 2tb and 1tb are also 7200, but the 1tb has 16mb cache compared to 64 for the 2tb and 3 tb.

The 1tb is $72, 2tb is $80 and 3tb is $110 on amazon.

This or the Touro.....

 

[Gaogaogao]

sata 2 inside, usb 3 outside. its weird

 

[Lima]

sata 2 inside, usb 3 outside. its weird

Why is that weird? Again no mechanical drive is fast enough to be limited by the SATA II port and seeing how you can't change the internal drive what's the point of having SATA III in there?

 

[Ding II]

Why is it that an external hard drive through a usb cable is faster than a hard drive integrated directly into the system? This is the first example I have ever seen of an external being faster than an internal drive that isn't completely outmatched in spec.

The internal drive is 2.5 inch drive. A laptop drive. Laptop drives have been slower than crap since the dawn of time. Even at the same RPM, the edge of a 2.5" platter is moving past the read/write heads more slowly than the edge of a 3.5" drive. Couple this with the fact that an external drive may indeed be spinning at a higher RPM, then yeah, it's often not even close. "Completely outmatched in spec" is a good way to describe it.

SATA II vs. USB 3.0 has likely nothing to do with it. Both interfaces are much faster than any spinny drive you're likely to come across. (An SSD might be fast enough to expose SATA II's weaknesses, however. I'm looking forward to those benchmarks.)

Question: I'll clearly want to buy a 3.5", 7200 RPM external drive if and when I get one. (Maybe a hybrid) Sadly, the manufacturers often don't seem to advertise the specs of the actual drive hardware inside their products. Sometimes it's obvious, since the entire unit is tiny and thus it's safe to assume that's there's a craptastic 2.5-incher in there. But sometimes it's hard to tell. Do "USB powered" drives always use 2.5" drives? Conversely, do "separately powered" drives typically use 3.5" drives?

Or do I always need to Google for specs?

 

[Ding II]

But yeah I thought even USB 3 might bottleneck a 7200rpm drive, that's great it doesn't, thanks for that!

USB 3.0 doesn't even bottleneck SSDs. (Although it's getting close at that point.)

 

[golem]

Question: I'll clearly want to buy a 3.5", 7200 RPM external drive if and when I get one. (Maybe a hybrid) Sadly, the manufacturers often don't seem to advertise the specs of the actual drive hardware inside their products. Sometimes it's obvious, since the entire unit is tiny and thus it's safe to assume that's there's a craptastic 2.5-incher in there. But sometimes it's hard to tell. Do "USB powered" drives always use 2.5" drives? Conversely, do "separately powered" drives typically use 3.5" drives?

Or do I always need to Google for specs?

Im just buying a normal hard drive and getting a usb3 enclosure

 

[Big Papa Husker]

Damn, as a PS4 user I am super jelly of Xbox One users getting every cool improvement on their OS. I'm already out of space

I will get the console down the road so the more improvements, the better.

You know you can upgrade the internal PS4 drive right?

 

[LowerLevel]

by my quick research, the 2tb and 1tb are also 7200, but the 1tb has 16mb cache compared to 64 for the 2tb and 3 tb.

The 1tb is $72, 2tb is $80 and 3tb is $110 on amazon.

This or the Touro.....

The 2tb unit is the one I bought earlier. I wish I was still a prime member... But I can wait. I'm just hoping it lasts. After so many years of having a computer, I have yet to have an hdd fail.

 

[VE3TRO]

Anyone tested an SSHD yet? Mine wont be here for a few days.

 

[Syrus]

Not much an improvement for Wolfenstein though I'm only loading up one chapter.

Using a Seagate 7200 rpm 1.5TB.

Took 12 minutes to move from internal to external harddrive.

Internal: menu: 41.12 seconds; to load chp 12: 13.23 seconds

External: To get to menu: 40.05; load chp 12: 13.11 seconds

but its better but again, DR 3 and Ryse have seen big jumps and forza also.

 

[Syrus]

by my quick research, the 2tb and 1tb are also 7200, but the 1tb has 16mb cache compared to 64 for the 2tb and 3 tb.

The 1tb is $72, 2tb is $80 and 3tb is $110 on amazon.

This or the Touro.....

look on ebay, saw 3 TB for 99 but I wanted to use prime shipping

yes 1-3 TB are 7200 and 4 TB is 5900

they all or at least 2-3 have higher MB caches which is better

 

[Black Republican]

You know you can upgrade the internal PS4 drive right?

he prob wants to go higher than 1.5tb internal it can take at the moment for the future.

 

[plasmawave]

Dat secret sauce.

 

[AlmostMilk]

We need to see if different brands will make a difference. I know it did back when they introduced USB drives on the 360.

 

[MauroNL]

Picked up a USB 3.0 Seagate 2TB 7200 RPM (AC powered) drive today. Installation was quick and easy and started moving some stuff over and comparing loading times between the internal and external. Results I've done today are below:

Assassins Creed IV Black Flag (digital):

Booting to title screen:
Internal 34.8 seconds
External 32.9 seconds

Loading my 83% savegame :
Internal: 20.7 seconds
External: 17.5 seconds

Peggle 2 (digital)

Booting to title screen:
Internal: 23.7 seconds
External: 20.9 seconds

Metal Gear Solid V Ground Zeroes (digital)

Booting to title screen:
Internal: 42.8 seconds
External: 39.9 seconds

I'm gonna test the rest of my games tommorow including Forza 5, Dead Rising 3, FIFA 14, Trials Fusion, Thief and maybe Tomb Raider. Happy to already notice a speed increase. Didn't notice any faster installation though, so that is still disc related.

 

[StalkerUKCG]

Are you seriously telling me you couldn't remove seven characters from the post to put the time

But he clearly needs 2 rocks ...

 

[Black Republican]

Picked up a USB 3.0 Seagate 2TB 7200 RPM (AC powered) drive today..

this one?

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178116

 

[MauroNL]

this one?

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178116

Yep, exactly that one. Sorry forgot to include a link.

 

[Redshirt]

I have the 4TB Seagate. I read the difference in average access speed is 6 percent (about 145MB/s vs. 155MB/s).

 

[Pathos]

So it's better to go w/ the seagate 3TB because it's 7200 RPM? I would've thought that the 4TB would have been 7200 also.

 

[Lima]

So it's better to go w/ the seagate 3TB because it's 7200 RPM? I would've thought that the 4TB would have been 7200 also.

Yes. The 4TB is more complex. The additional layer means it has slower seek times and produces more heat. That is why they have reduced the RPM. It's the same for the SSHD. The 2TB is a 720rpm drive but the 4TB is 5900.

 

[Redshirt]

It depends I think. The 3TB drives will achieve the best read speeds, but the 4TB model isn't far off plus it runs cooler and lasts longer theoretically and in my experience.

 

[statham]

certain newer 5400 can be faster then 7200?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4Faau_r7Rs

 

[Syrus]

So it's better to go w/ the seagate 3TB because it's 7200 RPM? I would've thought that the 4TB would have been 7200 also.

yes 4TB area little slower, you want the 2-3 TB

 

[T0wRen]

Stop saying this. All of you in this thread.

The internal drive doesn't get limited by the SATA II port inside the box. No mechanical drive is fast enough to saturate it. Only the latest SSD's would be restrained by it and see a benefit from SATA III which is why neither Sony nor Microsoft put it on their motherboards.

It's not USB 3.0, it is the drive and the drive alone. Even a USB 2.0 external would be faster.

The 500GB Samsung they put in is the oldest and slowest shit you can find on the market today. All for cost reasons. Sony does the same.

But you're BOTH right. The drive inside the Xbox One is not very fast, but USB 3.0 also has faster theoretical speeds than SATA ll.

 

[mcrommert]

Wow this thread is delivering in hardware unknowledgable people

Internal hard drive is serving much more than games...it is recording upload content...loading bits of is...there is part being used as a swap drive (this is windows)...that can easily explain the difference...and sata2 is not going to be saturated by a 5400rpm drive...as far as I can remember a 10,000 rpm cheetah drive couldn't saturate it

 

[statham]

I'm reading the seagate barracuda 7200 drive runs hot but is fast, but I'm also reading the usb powered my passport ultra is extremely fast and is comparable with the fastest externals but doesn't mention all or just the usb powered ones. I can't decide, Heat usually kills HDs& but I want improved performance. We need more tests.

edit: the barracuda drive is the one in seagate expansion.

 

[Chettlar]

Anybody tried an SSD or SSHD yet?


Still wish we could replace the internal hard drive though.

 

[tapedeck]

Hmm, wonder if a faster drive would improve the abysmal character select screen loading times in KI.

 

[SFenton]

Hmm, wonder if a faster drive would improve the abysmal character select screen loading times in KI.

Same, but replace KI with Trials Fusion.

 

[psn]

Why is everyone saying that the ps4 has only Sata II? Is there any proof for it?

 

[ohlawd]

holy crap @ those numbers.

dammit I'll bite on an external when I see a deal for one.

 

[Bsigg12]

Why is everyone saying that the ps4 has only Sata II? Is there any proof for it?

It's on the official spec sheet released by Sony.

 

[TransTrender]

So is a one minute load time normal?
That just seems tragic compared to the 5 second load times on the PC.

 

[Xone9]

ok, time to get a fatty usb 3 drive if this is the case...

 

[Chettlar]

Hmm, wonder if a faster drive would improve the abysmal character select screen loading times in KI.

No excuse not to try this. It's free ffs.

 

[DSN2K]

makes Xbox One look even more expensive with a slow internal hard drive.